Torres-Leon 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 under the court’s materiality inquiry that the relators “raised a reasonable inference that the Government would [have] den[ied] payment if it knew about [the defendants’] alleged violations”
• finding it “apparent” that “false terminally-ill certifications may lead the government to make a payment which it would not otherwise have made” (quotation omitted)
• A violation is material if a reasonable person ‘would attach importance to [it] in determining his choice of action in the transaction.’”
• “[The Court does] not expect Relators to know precisely the Government’s prosecutorial practices without the benefit of discovery.”
• “No one factor is dispositive, and our inquiry is holistic.”
• “No one factor is dispositive, and our inquiry is holistic.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).