08-CV-724 United States of America et al v. Wisconsin Bell Inc

Decision and Order

Relator Todd Heath brought a qui tam action under the False Claims Act alleging that defendant Wisconsin Bell, Inc., fraudulently obtained subsidies by falsely certifying that it was providing telecommunications services to schools and libraries at the lowest rate charged to similarly situated customers for similar services. Wisconsin Bell filed a motion for summary judgment on three grounds. First, Wisconsin Bell argued it could not be liable for any damages because fund from which the subsidies were paid was primarily financed through carrier contributions, not the United States government. Therefore, it argued, the United States could not be injured. Second, Wisconsin Bell argued that Heath's expert inappropriately compared two technologies and two customers that were not similar as a matter of law and, therefore, all related claims should be barred. Finally, Wisconsin Bell argued that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act are unconstitutional.

The Court found that, if Wisconsin Bell is found to have violated the False Claims Act, damages will be available for the entire amount of money in the Fund because any injury to the Fund is an injury to the government. In addition, the Court found that the correct measure of damages is the entire amount of any fraudulently obtained claim. As to the similarity of the technologies and customers, the Court found that genuine issues of material fact precluded granting summary judgment and, furthermore, there was not enough evidence to determine that the comparison is inappropriate as a matter of law. Finally, the Court agreed with numerous other Circuit and District Courts in finding that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act do not violate the Constitution.

23-CV-642 Kovacic et al. v. Oconto County et al.

Decision and Order Granting in Part Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment and Denying Motion for Sanctions

Plaintiffs Kevin and Tammy Kovacic brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for damages against fifteen law enforcement officers and the two counties and city that employed them, Oconto and Forest Counties and the City of Crandon, for allegedly violating Plaintiffs’ rights.  The case arises out of the stop of a vehicle in which Plaintiffs were lawfully transporting legal hemp to a customer in northeast Wisconsin in the course of Ms. Kovacic’s business, Wautoma Cannabis Queen, LLC.  When a drug detection dog alerted on the car and the hemp tested positive for the presence of THC, law enforcement officers seized the hemp, arrested Mr. Kovacic, and booked him into the Oconto County Jail.  By the time the hemp was tested and found to be lawful, it had lost all value.  Defendants filed motions for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ claims, and the County Defendants filed a motion for sanctions.  On summary judgment, the court found issues of fact as to whether two officers had violated Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment rights but found all of the individual officers immune under the doctrine of qualified immunity.  The court also found factual disputes as to whether Oconto County was liable under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).  The court denied the County Defendants’ motion for sanctions under Rule 11.