United States v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence of a conspiracy requires a relator to show that the defendant “conspired with one or more persons to get a false or fraudulent claim allowed or paid by the United States”
• finding that certifications that disbursements “were made for purposes and conditions of the grant or agreement” were false, when facts so showed
• stating that “it is questionable whether” the intracorporate conspiracy doctrine would apply to an FCA case but - without ruling on the issue
• finding a FCA -20- conspiracy where defendants “acted in agreement, explicit or implicit” to cause the submission of false claims
• rejecting the argument that FCA liability existed where the defendant certified, in a request for funds, that payments were proper, even though the request was approved on the basis of false reports
• “[wjhether a false statement is material depends on whether it ‘has a natural tendency to influence agency action or is capable of influencing agency action’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).