Swift, Susan v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that, at least when the complaint remains sealed, the government's right to dismiss an action, like its decisions not to prosecute, is \unfettered\ and \unreviewable\
• holding that § 3730(c)(2)(A) provides the government a virtually “unfettered right to dismiss [the] action.”
• noting that the district court held a hearing when the relator “opposed dismissal and requested a hearing”
• interpreting the federal FCA term “proceed with the action” as “go forward with the government running the litigation”
• disagreeing with the Sequoia decision and concluding that the government has “unfettered” discretion to dismiss false claims actions before the complaint is unsealed
• recognizing the government’s “un- fettered right” to dismiss qui tam actions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).