United States ex rel Cain v. Salish Kootenai College, Inc., No. 15-35001 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of relators' qui tam action alleging that the College violated the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. 3729-3733, by knowingly providing false progress reports on students in order to keep grant monies. The panel held that the Tribe is not a "person" under the FCA. The panel remanded for further jurisdictional factfinding on whether the College was an arm of the Tribe that shares the Tribe's status for purposes of the FCA.
Court Description: False Claims Act. The panel reversed the district court’s dismissal of the complaint in a qui tam action brought by former employees of Salish Kootenai College, Inc., alleging that the College violated the False Claims Act by knowingly providing false progress reports on students in order to keep grant monies coming from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Indian Health Service. The False Claims Act permits suits against any “person” who defrauds the government by knowingly presenting a false or fraudulent claim. UNITED STATES EX REL. CAIN V. SALISH KOOTENAI 3 COLLEGE The district court held that the College was an arm of the Confederated Salish Kootenai Tribes (“Tribe”) that shared the Tribe’s sovereign immunity. The panel held that Indian tribes were entitled to the same interpretative presumption as States, which are excluded from the term “person” under the False Claims Act. The panel concluded that the Tribe, like other federally recognized Indian tribes, was presumptively excluded from the term “person.” Turning to the question whether the College functioned as an arm of the Tribe and thereby shared the Tribe’s sovereign status, the panel held that the proper standard for answering the question was the test in White v. University of California, 765 F.3d 1010, 1025 (9th Cir. 2014). The panel remanded so that the district court could apply the White factors. The panel also directed the district court to allow appropriate discovery before determining whether the College was an arm of the Tribe under White.
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.