Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 189 F.3d 542 - United States ex rel. Durcholz v. FKW Inc.

United States ex rel. Durcholz v. FKW Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

189 F.3d 542 · 1999

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
2
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably United States Totten v. Bombardier Corporation (2004), United States v. Southland Management Corp. (2003)

17 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

410199920002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (False Claims Act) · 31 U.S.C. § 3730 (False Claims Act)

Relies on United States ex rel. Hagood v. Sonoma County Water Agency · United States Lamers v. City of Green Bay · United States v. Murphy · Kunik v. Racine County

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “). But see United States ex rel. Hagood v. Sonoma County Water Agency, 929 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1991) (”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “From the start, [government] officials were more interested in speed than cost and made their decisions in accordance with these priorities. They classified the project as a performance specification in order to expedite the bidding, knowing that the UPB did not contain dredging line-items. They later directed FEW to modify its proposal to match the Midwest bid and told FEW to resubmit its invoices without the excavation line-items. Thus, the government not only knew that FEW’s proposal and invoices contained excavation line-items, it directed FEW to use those pricing numbers. In essence, then, Durcholz is alleging that the government was defrauded by the very activities that its agents ordered.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The mens rea element, `knowingly,' requires that the defendant have actual knowledge of (or deliberately ignore or act in reckless disregard of) the truth or falsity of the information. . . . Thus, `innocent mistakes or negligence are not actionable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.