ESMIE LORNA BRYAN v. OUTBACK STEAKHOUSE OF FLORIDA, LLC

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that letter written by primary sponsors of statute thirteen years after its enactment explaining their intent is of scant or no value
• observing that amendments to the jurisdictional provisions of the False Claims Act do not apply retroactively
• stating that application of noscitur a sociis canon was not persuasive in that case because “list of three items, each quite distinct from the other no matter how construed, is too short to be particularly illuminating”
• translating the statutory interpretation canon noscitur a sociis to “a word may be known by the company it keeps”
• discussing \the potential for parasitic lawsuits by those who learn of the fraud through public channels and seek remuneration although they contributed nothing to the exposure of the fraud.\
• finding same letter “of 14 scant or no value” in interpreting 1986 bar

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).