United States Ex Rel. Ostrager v. New Orleans Chapter, Associated General Contractors, Inc.

Supreme Court

United States Ex Rel. Ostrager v. New Orleans Chapter, Associated General Contractors, Inc.

317 U.S. 562, 63 S. Ct. 393, 87 L. Ed. 458, 1943 U.S. LEXIS 1021

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedFebruary 15, 1943

Docket236

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 317 U.S. 562 (United States Ex Rel. Ostrager v. New Orleans Chapter, Associated General Contractors, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States Ex Rel. Ostrager v. New Orleans Chapter, Associated General Contractors, Inc., 317 U.S. 562, 63 S. Ct. 393, 87 L. Ed. 458, 1943 U.S. LEXIS 1021 (1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Black

delivered the opinion of the Court. •

This action is substantially similar to that in United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, ante, p. 537. Eelying on § § 5438 and 3490-93, Eevised Statutes, the petitioner charges that the respondents caused the government *563 $7,620 damages by submitting fraudulent collusive bids on a hospital constructed with Federal Public Works Administration financial assistance. The petitioner in a qui tarn action asks double damages plus $2,000 from each of seventeen respondents. The respondents had previously been indiqted by the United States government in a criminal action and had paid fines totalling $5,000.

The respondents answered on the merits, made other pleadings not relevant at this stage of the case, and offered two special defenses: that the action placed them in double jeopardy in violation of the Fifth Amendment and that the statutes involved did not provide a basis for such a cause of action. The District Court, without reaching the merits, dismissed the complaint on the theory of double jeopardy. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the complaint but rested its conclusion on the belief that no claim against the United States was involved since the United States was not a party to the contract. It relied heavily on the Hess case as decided by the Circuit Court.

For the reasons set forth in our opinion in the Hess case, we believe that the decision below should be reversed.

Reversed.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter joins in this opinion but concurs on the question of double jeopardy for the reasons set forth in his opinion in United States ex rei. Marcus v. Hess, ante, p. 537. Mr. Justice Jackson dissents for the reasons set forth in his opinion in the same case. Mr. Justice Murphy to,ok no part in the consideration or disposition of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice Black

delivered the opinion of the Court. •

This action is substantially similar to that in United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, ante, p. 537. Eelying on § § 5438 and 3490-93, Eevised Statutes, the petitioner charges that the respondents caused the government *563 $7,620 damages by submitting fraudulent collusive bids on a hospital constructed with Federal Public Works Administration financial assistance. The petitioner in a qui tarn action asks double damages plus $2,000 from each of seventeen respondents. The respondents had previously been indiqted by the United States government in a criminal action and had paid fines totalling $5,000.

The respondents answered on the merits, made other pleadings not relevant at this stage of the case, and offered two special defenses: that the action placed them in double jeopardy in violation of the Fifth Amendment and that the statutes involved did not provide a basis for such a cause of action. The District Court, without reaching the merits, dismissed the complaint on the theory of double jeopardy. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the complaint but rested its conclusion on the belief that no claim against the United States was involved since the United States was not a party to the contract. It relied heavily on the Hess case as decided by the Circuit Court.

For the reasons set forth in our opinion in the Hess case, we believe that the decision below should be reversed.

Reversed.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter joins in this opinion but concurs on the question of double jeopardy for the reasons set forth in his opinion in United States ex rei. Marcus v. Hess, ante, p. 537. Mr. Justice Jackson dissents for the reasons set forth in his opinion in the same case. Mr. Justice Murphy to,ok no part in the consideration or disposition of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

317 U.S. 562, 63 S. Ct. 393, 87 L. Ed. 458, 1943 U.S. LEXIS 1021, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-ex-rel-ostrager-v-new-orleans-chapter-associated-general-scotus-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack