Simpson v. Bayer Healthcare, No. 15-2220 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseAs long as the relator had direct knowledge of the true state of the facts, she can be an original source even though her knowledge of the misrepresentation was not first-hand. In this case, the Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of relator's qui tam action under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3729-3733. The district court reasoned that information underlying relator's allegations had been previously disclosed. The court held that the district court misapplied circuit precedent on the meaning of "original source" because relator did not have to have direct and independent knowledge of Bayer's allegedly false communications to the Department of Defense. The district court did not reach other arguments raised by Bayer. Therefore, the court remanded for the district court to address these matters in the first instance.
Court Description: Colloton, Author, with Loken and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - False Claims Act. For the court's prior decision in the matter, see In re Baycol Products Litigation, 732 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2013). The district court erred in dismissing plaintiff's qui tam action under the False Claims Act for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, based on its conclusion that her action was based on public disclosure of allegations or transactions and that she was not, therefore, an original source of the information upon which her allegations were founded; under this circuit's prior case law, so long as the relator has direct knowledge of the true state of facts, she can be an original source even though her knowledge of the misrepresentation is not first-hand; remanded for further proceedings. Judge Loken, dissenting.
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.