Robertson v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that to engage in protected activity, an employee should \express concerns about possible fraud to their employers\
• holding that a claim under section 3730(h) requires discharge in retaliation for actions taken “in an effort to bring, or to help the government bring, a False Claims Act suit”
• holding that employee’s complaints must allege illegal, unlawful, or false claims to constitute protected activity
• concluding that relator failed to rebut defendant’s trial testimony regarding lack of knowledge
• holding that the plaintiffs internal reports did not constitute protected activity in part because the plaintiff “admitted that he never used the terms ‘illegal,’ ‘unlawful,’ or ‘qui tarn action’ in characterizing his concerns”
• concluding that plaintiff claiming False Claims Act retaliation was not engaged in protected activity because his “reporting was qualitatively different” from that of successful plaintiffs who “did express concerns about possible fraud to their employers”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).