out that restitution of the under-payment in the payroll had been made to the workmen as well as the fine paid to the authorities and therefore no damage accrued to the United States Government by way of the false claim.
There has been no issue taken with the statements made by the defendant as to his restitution and other conduct. However, the statute expressly allows such an action to be maintained in the absence of any damage to the United States for the liquidated penal sum of $ 2,000.00. See 31 U.S.C.A. § 231.
It is also clear that the proceedings under this Act are civil in nature and therefore do not subject the defendant to any double jeopardy as he maintains. See United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537, 63 S. Ct. 379, 87 L. Ed. 443 (1943).
Research on the above statute discloses the recent case of United States v. Sanders, 194 F.Supp. 955 (E.D.Ark.1961). This case is extremely analagous to the instant situation and clearly indicates the result which must be reached.
By virtue of the defendant's guilty plea to the willful charge in the prior criminal proceedings, he falls squarely under the statutory language contained in the False Claims Act. His efforts at a defense in this proceedings fall short of establishing any legal reason to deny the claim of the United States.
Though the defendant is being penalized a large sum for an offense which may be considered minor as regards the amount of money involved, it must be pointed out that he was guilty of a willful violation of an explicit statutory provision and must now pay the penalty therefor. The judiciary is constrained to follow validly enacted legislation.
It is the order of this Court that judgment shall be rendered for the United States in the amount of $ 2,000.00.
Let an appropriate order be submitted.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.