Schindler Elevator Corp. v. US ex rel. Kirk
Holding
A federal agency's written response to a FOIA request for records is a "report"? within the meaning of the disclosure bar of the False Claims Act. (Kagan, J., recused).
Plain English Holding
A private plaintiff may not sue a government contractor under the False Claims Act (which provides a bounty for private litigants who prove fraud against the government by government contractors) based on fraud that had already been disclosed by the government in response to a request under the Freedom of Information Act, which generally requires the government to disclose documents in its possession in response to an individual’s request.
Judgment
Reversed, 5-3, in an opinion by Clarence Thomas on May 16, 2011. Justice Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Breyer and Sotomayor.(Kagan, J., recused).
Merits Briefs
- Brief for Petitioner Schindler Elevator Corporation
- Brief for Respondent United States of America Ex Rel. Daniel Kirk
- Reply brief for Petitioner Schindler Elevator Corporation
Amicus Briefs
- Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, American Hospital Association, and Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America in Support of Reversal
- Brief for the Equal Employment Advisory Council in Support of Reversal
- Brief for the United Technologies Corporation in Support of Neither Party
- Brief for the United States in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Public Citizen in Support of Respondent
- Brief for AARP in Support of Respondent
[##CERT-STAGE##]
Recommended Citation: Schindler Elevator Corp. v. US ex rel. Kirk, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/schindler-elevator-corporation-v-united-states-ex-rel-kirk/