§Why CasetextPricing

Schubert v. All Children's Health System, Inc. et al

MEMORANDUM in opposition re Motion to dismiss third amended complaint

29 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 273,590 times   368 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  2. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,123 times   606 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"

  3. Neder v. United States

    527 U.S. 1 (1999)   Cited 5,013 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the failure to submit an uncontested element of an offense to a jury may be harmless

  4. Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

    529 U.S. 120 (2000)   Cited 1,546 times   45 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress had not yet empowered the FDA to regulate tobacco products

  5. TRW Inc. v. Andrews

    534 U.S. 19 (2001)   Cited 1,200 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding a cardinal principal of statutory interpretation is that “no clause, sentence, or word shall be superfluous, void, or insignificant”

  6. Bryant v. Avado Brands, Inc.

    187 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 1999)   Cited 1,301 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a court, when considering a motion to dismiss in a securities fraud case, may take judicial notice . . . of relevant public documents required to be filed with the SEC”

  7. U.S. ex Rel. Grubbs v. Kanneganti

    565 F.3d 180 (5th Cir. 2009)   Cited 798 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants received adequate notice in a False Claims Act case where the complaint alleged a scheme to submit false claims and enough details that the defendants—who "will be in possession of the most relevant records, such as patients’ charts, doctors’ notes, and internal billing records"—could adequately investigate and defend the claims

  8. U.S. ex Rel. Clausen v. Laboratory Corp.

    290 F.3d 1301 (11th Cir. 2002)   Cited 830 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding Rule 9(b) applies to False Claims Act claims

  9. United States ex rel. Nathan v. Takeda Pharms. N. Am., Inc.

    707 F.3d 451 (4th Cir. 2013)   Cited 468 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff leave to file a fourth amended complaint after repeated prior dismissals for failure to sufficiently plead his claim

  10. Reeves v. Astrue

    526 F.3d 732 (11th Cir. 2008)   Cited 376 times
    Holding that under EAJA "attorney's fees are awarded to the prevailing party, not to the prevailing party's attorney"

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 160,289 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  12. Section 3729 - False claims

    31 U.S.C. § 3729   Cited 6,840 times   648 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable "any person" who knowingly causes false claims to be presented

  13. Section 1396b - Payment to States

    42 U.S.C. § 1396b   Cited 621 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth, inter alia, requirements of state Medicaid fraud units

  14. Section 68.081 - Florida False Claims Act; short title

    Fla. Stat. § 68.081   Cited 39 times   5 Legal Analyses

    Sections 68.081 - 68.092 may be cited as the "Florida False Claims Act." Fla. Stat. § 68.081 s.1, ch. 94-316; s.1, ch. 2007-236; s.1, ch. 2013-104. Amended by 2013 Fla. Laws, ch. 104, s 1, eff. 7/1/2013.

  15. Section 435.1002 - FFP for services

    42 C.F.R. § 435.1002   Cited 2 times

    (a) Except for the limitations and conditions specified in §§ 435.1007 , 35.1008 , 435.1009 , and 438.814 of this chapter, FFP is available in expenditures for Medicaid services for all beneficiaries whose coverage is required or allowed under this part. (b) FFP is available in expenditures for services provided to beneficiaries who were eligible for Medicaid in the month in which the medical care or services were provided except that, for beneficiaries who establish eligibility for Medicaid by deducting

  16. Section 411.375 - Fees for the cost of advisory opinions

    42 C.F.R. § 411.375   1 Legal Analyses

    (a)Hourly rate. CMS will charge an hourly rate of $220. Parties may request an estimate from CMS after submitting a complete request. Before issuing the advisory opinion, CMS will calculate the final fee for responding to the request. (b)Agreement to pay all costs. (1) By submitting the request for an advisory opinion, the requestor agrees, except as indicated in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, to pay all costs the Department incurs in responding to the request for an advisory opinion. (2) In its