Case Citator › United States ex rel. Rost v. Pfizer, Inc.

United States ex rel. Rost v. Pfizer, Inc.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
First Circuit
Citation
507 F.3d 720
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
41 of 41
Citing cases (total)
41
Treatment dates
2008
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. United States ex rel. Rost v. Pfizer, Inc. was overruled in part by Allison Engine Co. v. United States ex rel. Sanders, as the treatment listed below establishes. All 41 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The First Circuit explained in United States ex rel. Gagne v. City of Worcester that Allison Engine forecloses a broad reading of Rost's requirement to identify claims presented to the government for claims under former False Claims Act subsections (a)(2) and (a)(3). Rost's public disclosure and fraud pleading rulings were not displaced by that holding.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

41 later cases cite United States ex rel. Rost v. Pfizer, Inc.; 41 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on United States ex rel. Rost v. Pfizer, Inc.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Supreme Court rejected a requirement that a false record or statement be presented to the government for liability under former False Claims Act subsection (a)(2), displacing Rost's broader presentment language.

    Allison Engine Co. v. United States ex rel. Sanders · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    What §3729(a)(2) demands is not proof that the defendant caused a false record or statement to be presented or submitted to the Government but that the defendant made a false record or statement for the purpose of getting “a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved by the Government.”
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States ex rel. Rost v. Pfizer, Inc. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace