Stoner v. Santa Clara County Office of Education

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the Stevens analysis “was driven by canons of statutory construction relating to protection of the state’s sovereign immunity”
• holding that a pro se relator cannot “prosecute a qui tam action on behalf of the United States”
• recognizing that the Stevens analysis \was driven by canons of statutory construction relating to protection of the state’s sovereign immunity\
• holding that “a pro se relator cannot 20 prosecute a qui tam action on behalf of the United States”
• holding that a qui tam action against the 9 SCCOE was barred by the Eleventh Amendment
• concluding that pro se litigants may not prosecute claims based on fraud against the Unites States

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).