Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer, 520 U.S. 939, 11 (1997)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Cite as: 520 U. S. 939 (1997)

Opinion of the Court

courts are open to an FCA action brought by a private relator on behalf of the United States," whereas "[p]rior to 1986, once the United States learned of a false claim, only the Government could assert its rights under the FCA against the false claimant." Brief for Respondent 16; see also Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 14 (recognizing that the 1986 amendment "expanded the circumstances under which qui tam relators may pursue actions to enforce" a false claimant's liability to the Government).

The extension of an FCA cause of action to private parties in circumstances where the action was previously foreclosed is not insignificant. As a class of plaintiffs, qui tam relators are different in kind than the Government. They are motivated primarily by prospects of monetary reward rather than the public good. As we have previously recognized:

"'[Qui tam statutes are] passed upon the theory, based on experience as old as modern civilization, that one of the least expensive and most effective means of preventing frauds on the Treasury is to make the perpetrators of them liable to actions by private persons acting, if you please, under the strong stimulus of personal ill will or the hope of gain. Prosecutions conducted by such means compare with the ordinary methods as the enterprising privateer does to the slow-going public vessel.' " United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U. S. 537, 541, n. 5 (1943) (quoting United States v. Griswold, 24 F. 361, 366 (Ore. 1885)).

Qui tam relators are thus less likely than is the Government to forgo an action arguably based on a mere technical non-compliance with reporting requirements that involved no harm to the public fisc.5

5 That a qui tam suit is brought by a private party "on behalf of the United States," see Brief for Respondent 17, does not alter the fact that a relator's interests and the Government's do not necessarily coincide. Moreover, as the statute specifies, qui tam actions are brought both

949

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007