Sandoz v. Consolidated Textile Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that implied false certification is appropriately applied “in limited circumstances” where the underlying statute or regulation expressly states that payment is conditioned on compliance
• noting that the FCA \does not encompass those instances of regulatory noncompliance that are irrelevant to the government's disbursement decisions\
• noting that the “most common false claim” involves “a claim for goods or services not provided, or provided in violation of contractual terms, specification, statute, or regulation”
• reasoning that determining whether a physician’s spirometry test was of a quality meeting “professionally recognized standards” would require the court to “step outside” its area of competence and “apply a qualitative standard measuring the efficacy of those procedures”
• “[A]n improper claim is aimed at extracting money the government otherwise would not have paid.”
• abrogated on 10 other grounds by Universal Health Services, Inc. v. U.S., 136 S. 11 Ct. 1989 (2016)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).