William Fanslow v. Chicago Manufacturing Center, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an employee engages in protected activity under § 3730(h) where “(1) the employee in good faith believes, and (2) a reasonable employee in the same or similar circumstances might believe, that the employer is committing fraud against the government”
• articulating the reasonableness requirement for protected activity as containing a subjective and objective component
• protected conduct is where employee had reasonable, good-faith belief that the employer is committing fraud against the United States
• “Congress intended to protect employees from retaliation while they are collecting information about a possible fraud, before they have put all the pieces of the puzzle together.”
• under FCA, employee’s whistleblowing is only protected activity if “a reasonable employee in the same or similar circumstances might [also] believe” that the employer is defrauding the government
• “The statute does not, however, protect an employee who just imagines fraud without proof’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).