United States of America, Ex rel.linda A. Lujan v. Hughes Aircraft Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “a ‘material facts,’ not ‘identical facts,’ test should be used to determine if a ‘related action [is] based on the facts underlying the pending action’ ”
• holding that “a ‘material facts,’ not ‘identical facts,’ test should be used to determine if a ‘related action [is] based on the facts underlying the pending action’”
• holding that Section 3730(b)(5) “bars later-filed actions alleging the same material elements of fraud described in an earlier suit, regardless of whether the allegations incorporate somewhat different details”
• holding that first-to-file bar prohibits action because it was filed while initial action remained pending, and assuming that first-to-file bar would not have applied if initial action was no longer pending
• holding that previous appellate court decision reversing dismissal for lack of jurisdiction based on a statute did not preclude the district court on remand from dismissing for lack of jurisdiction based on another statute not previously considered by the court
• holding that previous appellate court decision reversing dismissal for lack of jurisdiction based on a statute did not preclude the district court on remand from dismissing for lack of jurisdiction based on mother statute not previously considered by the court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).