United States v. Stanley N. Howell, Warren S. Cochran, Cochran & Howell, a Partnership, Post Cleaners, Thrifty Cleaners

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the pre-1986 version of FCA did not reach reverse false claims
• suit by the United States against a cleaning concession for breach of a contract with a post exchange
• suit by the United States against a cleaning concession for breach of a contract with a post exchange
• “A ‘complaint is not to be dismissed because the plaintiff's lawyer has 8 The district court did not take up this issue. 80 GIBSON V. CITY OF PORTLAND misconceived the proper legal theory of the claim.’” (citation omitted)
• “A 13 ‘complaint is not to be dismissed . . . if it shows that the plaintiff is entitled to any relief 14 which the court can grant, regardless of whether it asks for the proper relief.’” (citation 15 omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).