No. 23-813

Brutus Trading, LLC v. Standard Chartered Bank, et al.

Lower Court: Second Circuit

Docketed: 2024-01-29

Status: Denied

Type: Paid

Response Waived

Tags: civil-procedure deferred-prosecution-agreement due-process evidentiary-hearing false-claims-act government-dismissal procedural-rights qui-tam statutory-interpretation

Latest Conference: 2024-02-23

Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether the Due Process Clause and 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(A) and (B) require an evidentiary hearing when the evidence for and against dismissal is sharply conflicting at which the Relator is provided an opportunity to subpoena witnesses and to examine Government witnesses who have supported the motion to dismiss.

Whether Relator is entitled to recover a share of funds paid by a defendant in an FCA action pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Due Process Clause and 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(A) and (B) require an evidentiary hearing