legal news


Register | Forgot Password

GRAYSON v. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO. PART - II

GRAYSON v. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO. PART - II
02:27:2007

GRAYSON v. PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO.





Filed 8/31/06




CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION



COPY


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA


THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT


(Sacramento)


----








STATE OF CALIFORNIA ex rel. ALAN GRAYSON,


Plaintiff and Appellant,


v.


PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE CO. et al.,


Defendants and Respondents.



C050296



(Super. Ct. No. 02AS00790)





Continue from Part I ………


Hansen, supra, 107 F.Supp.2d 1172 provides a second helpful template. Hansen reiterates two fundamental principles enunciated in Findley: that is, that a qui tam complaint is â€





Description Trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear qui tam relator's claim that telecommunications companies failed to report and deliver to state remaining balances on prepaid phone cards as required by the Unclaimed Property Law where allegations were already in the public domain and publicly available information was already sufficient to place the government on notice, and relator was not the original and direct source of the information.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale