USA, ex rel. John Raynor v. National Rural Utilities Co Op, et al., No. 11-2642 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseRaynor sued National Rural, a number of its officers, and alleged co-conspirators in a qui tam action for violations of the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. 3729-33. Raynor alleged that National Rural was violating the FCA by receiving Farmer Mac investment funds in violation of federal law. The district court dismissed the complaint with prejudice as to Raynor and he appealed. The court held that Raynor's complaint did not meet the standard of particularity required to survive the motion to dismiss and the district court properly dismissed the complaint under Rule 9(b). Even accepting Raynor's facts as true and construing all reasonable inferences most favorably to him, the complaint failed to allege the falsity of each claim. The district court properly dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6). Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Raynor's request to amend his dismissed complaint a fourth time or in denying his motion to reconsider that dismissal.
Court Description: Civil Case - False Claims Act. District court did not err in applying Rule 9's heightened pleading standard in False Claims Act action, and district court did not err in concluding the complaint failed to allege the falsity of each claim or allege knowing fraud. District court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for reconsideration and in denying leave to amend a fourth time.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.