Table of Contents

SERVICES CASES

• U.S. ex rel Fried v. W. Independent Sch. Dist.
• Pardini v. Allegheny Intermediate Unit
• Jacobs v. Clark County Sch. Dist.
• U.S. v. Jesco Constr. Corp.
• Huntleigh USA Corp. v. US

SERVICES CASES

U.S. 5th Circuit, May 09, 2008
U.S. ex rel Fried v. W. Independent Sch. Dist., No. 07-50732
Dismissal of a claim under the False Claims Act for Social Security fraud is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's claims were based on publicly disclosed information; and 2) plaintiff was not the original source of the information since he failed to show that it was qualitatively different from that which had already been discovered. Read more...

U.S. 3rd Circuit, May 12, 2008
Pardini v. Allegheny Intermediate Unit, No. 07-1403
In a case involving an attorney-parent who sought attorney's fees in a lawsuit filed on behalf of his daughter pursuant to the IDEA, denial of fees is affirmed where: 1) the court's earlier decision in this case did not decide the issue of whether plaintiffs were entitled to attorney's fees; 2) scope of prior precedent was not limited to representation by an attorney-parent in administrative proceedings only; 3) such precedent governed this appeal, as there was substantial doubt that the case's earlier decisions foreclosed the attorney's fees issue; and 4) plaintiffs were not entitled to recover cost for services other than conductive education. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit, May 12, 2008
Jacobs v. Clark County Sch. Dist., No. 05-16434
In a case raising constitutional challenges to a public school district's mandatory dress policies or "school uniform policies," the circuit court rules that neither the school district's regulation, which created a standard dress code for all county students, nor the individual school uniform policies implemented thereunder violated plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise, or due process rights. Read more...

U.S. 5th Circuit, May 14, 2008
U.S. v. Jesco Constr. Corp., No. 06-31007
In a statutory interpleader action involving certain funds owed by the Army Corps of Engineers to defendant, summary judgment determining the parties' claims' respective priority is affirmed where: 1) losing intervenor's argument of equitable subrogation is not recognized by Louisiana courts; 2) although losing intervenor has a right of subrogation by operation of law, it is still inferior to the prevailing intervenor's perfected security interest claim. Read more...

U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, May 15, 2008
Huntleigh USA Corp. v. US, No. 2007-5118
In a company's action against the government alleging, inter alia, that the Aviation and Transportation Security Act's (ATSA) transfer of responsibility for passenger and baggage screening resulted in an unconstitutional taking of its property without just compensation, a judgment against plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff could not claim a taking since the ATSA did not regulate plaintiff directly but merely "frustrated" plaintiff's business expectations by reducing the demand for plaintiff's services; and 2) plaintiff was not entitled to compensation under ATSA section 101(g)(2) since it gives the government the power to assume the contracts but does not require it to do so. Read more...