P. v. Big Oil & Tire
Qui tam plaintiff Greg Sounhein appeals from a defense judgment on his False Claims Act cause of action ( ADDIN BA xc <@st> xl 26 s GYOFAP000001 xpl 1 l "Gov. Code, § 12650 et seq." Gov. Code, § 12650 et seq.)[1] after the granting of a motion for judgment in a nonjury trial ( ADDIN BA xc <@st> xl 24 s GYOFAP000002 xpl 1 l "Code Civ. Proc., § 631.8" Code Civ. Proc., § 631.8). The trial court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction under ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 36 s GYOFAP000029 l "section 12652, subdivision (d)(3)(A)" section 12652, former subdivision (d)(3)(A), which stated in pertinent part that “[n]o court shall have jurisdiction over an action under this article based upon the public disclosure of allegations or transactions in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in an investigation, report, hearing, or audit conducted by or at the request of the Senate, Assembly, auditor, or governing body of a political subdivision, or by the news media, unless . . . the action is an original source of the information.â€[2] Sounhein contends the trial court erred in concluding it lacked jurisdiction because there was no public disclosure, and even if there was, the disclosure was not made in any of the statutorily enumerated forums, and in any event, he was the original source of the information.
Comments on P. v. Big Oil & Tire