AARON SCOLNICK, DEFENDANT, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The facts in this case are fully set forth in the opinion below, United States v. Scolnick, D.Mass., 1963, 219 F.Supp.
408.
We find no merit in the appeal. The endorsement and deposit for collection of a government check known to be issued by mistake in payment of an obligation already, in fact, satisfied is the presentation •of a false claim within the meaning of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 231. Cf. Dimmick v. United States, 9 Cir., 1902, 116 F. 825, cert. den. 189 U.S. 509, 23 S.Ct. 850, 47 L.Ed.
923. The court was not obliged to accept the defendant’s protestations of innocence. Not only was he the principal officer and stockholder ■of the payee corporation, but the proceeds -of the checks were disbursed by him in .satisfaction of a corporate debt owed to liis father, and for wage obligations the ■nonpayment of which might have resulted in defendant’s incarceration, both reasons to suppose that he had been aware of the accounts receivable picture. Nor were direct personal benefits to the defendant required. Murray & Sorenson, Inc. v. United States, 1 Cir., 1953, 207 F. 2d 119, 42 A.L.R.2d 628.
Judgment will be entered affirming the judgment of the District Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Branker, 395 F.2d 881 (2d Cir. 1968)
-
United States v. McLEOD, 721 F.2d 282 (9th Cir. 1983)
-
United States Ex Rel. Doe v. DeGregorio, 510 F. Supp. 2d 877 (M.D. Fla. 2007)…rio argues that he did not benefit individually by the alleged overpay-ments. This argument has no bearing, however, on the probable validity of the Government’s claim for a debt pursuant to the False Claims Act. See Scolnick v. United States, 331 F.2d 598, 599 (1st Cir.1964)(direct personal benefits to the defendant are not required in a claim brought under the False Claims Act); United States v. R & F Prop, of Lake County, Inc., 433 F.3d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir.2005) (the three elements of a caus…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ching v. United States, 189 U.S. 509 (U.S. 1903)
- Murray & Sorenson, Inc. v. United States, 207 F.2d 119 (1st Cir. 1953)