Document: 390 U.S. 228 88 S.Ct. 959 19 L.Ed.2d 1061 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.NEIFERT-WHITE COMPANY. No. 267. Argued Jan. 18, 1968. Decided March 5, John S. Martin, Jr., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Patrick F. Hooks, Townsend, Mont., respondent. Mr. Justice FORTAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This is an action by United States to recover statutory forfeitures under False Claims Act.1 The question whether Act applies supplying false information in support application a federal agency, Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), loan. District Court dismissed on ground that CCC loan, as distinguished from claim payment obligation owed Government, not 'claim' within meaning Act. Appeals Ninth Circuit affirmed. We granted certiorari. 389 814, 69, 65 (1967). 2 authorized make loans grain growers finance construction or purchase storage facilities. § 4(h) Charter Act, amended, 62 Stat. 1071, 15 U.S.C. 714b(h). Pursuant its authority statute, 714b(d), has adopted regulations providing granting amounts exceed 80% actual price bins. A grower who desires apply loan required his invoice showing and amount down made him. 23 Fed.Reg. 9687. 3 Since Government's complaint was failure state cause action, allegations must be taken true present purposes. According complaint, respondent dealer In 1959, selling bins 12 farmers, one respondent's officers prepared invoices which deliberately overstated. purpose fraudulently induce extend customers exceeding price. were submitted along with applications, agency relied overstated determining subsequently made. claims forfeiture $2,000 each alleged violations 4 issue this case narrow precise: Does reach 'claims' favorable Government upon applications it confined payments due owing Government?2 It position term read sense include only demand based liability claimant. Respondent relies v. Cohn, 270 339, 46 251, 70 L.Ed. 616 (1926), McNinch, 356 595, 78 950, 1001 (1958), reading. 5 Cohn involved criminal proceeding earlier version Act.3 concerned fraudulent obtain release merchandise did belong being held customs authorities bailee only. involve attempt, fraud, part money property, either discharge response discretionary action. language Court's cannot decision point facts present.4 6 brought suit damages form, against persons had filed home-modernization private bank regularly insured Federal Housing Administration losses such loans. sought defendants, 'routinely' FHA. at 597, n. 4, S.Ct., 951. since FHA 'disburses no funds nor does otherwise suffer immediate financial detriment,' id., 599, 952, transaction ambit emphasized distinction between contracts insurance loss those transactions pays lends money. For purposes case, we need reconsider validity distinction. sufficient note instant involves statement effect inducing immediately 7 precise presented never been considered However, both history well thrust our prior decisions, indicate answer inquiry. original passed 1863 result investigations use government during Civil War. Debates time suggest intended all types without qualification, might Government.5 form broadly phrased any person makes causes 'any against' States, 'bill, receipt, * claim, affidavit deposition' 'obtaining aiding approval of' claim. various contexts questions proper have presented, consistently refused accept rigid, restrictive reading, even when statute imposed sanctions civil.6 See, e.g., ex rel. Marcus Hess, 317 537, 63 379, 87 443 (1943). 8 On very day decided also three cases holding Act.7 debated word 'claim,' but CCC, wholly owned corporation, 'the department officer thereof' statute. course matter, noted objective Congress enacting 'was protect property claims, regardless particular function, instrumentality made' '(b)y ordinary standard certainly comprehensive enough achieve purpose.' Rainwater 590, 592, 946, 948, 996 (1958). 9 Analogous reasoning leads us hold today should given reading urges. remedial reaches beyond legally enforced, attempts pay out sums believe 'claims,' used broad conduct complaint. Accordingly, reverse judgment remand further proceedings accordance opinion. 10 Reversed remanded. 11 MARSHALL took consideration case. relevant part, provides follows: R.S. 3490 (1874): 'Any shall do commit acts prohibited provisions section fifty-four hundred thirty-eight, Title 'CRIMES,' forfeit sum two thousand dollars, and, addition, double may sustained reason doing committing act *.' 5438 'Every made, presents approval, civil, military, naval service thereof, knowing false, fictitious, fraudulent, who, obtaining makes, uses, used, bill, voucher, roll, account, certificate, affidavit, deposition, same contain fictitious entry, enters into agreement, combination, conspiracy defraud allowance imprisoned hard labor less than more five years, fined dollars.' aspect scheme altered codified 18 287 1001; see 2, infra. civil (forfeiture) codified, unaltered, 31 231, above-cited these continues official one. above-quoted survive insofar concerned. No other presented. expressly falsify 'receipt' 'for (a) claim.' See 1, supra. carried forward separate statutes currently force. Section crime fraudulent.' title subjects penalties '(w)hoever knowingly willfully falsifies, conceals covers up trick, scheme, device material fact, statements representations, uses writing document entry.' indicted still another 714m(a), prohibits making influencing CCC. '(I)t clear, light entire context, provision relating 'claim relates solely right asserted own claimant.' U.S., 345 346, 252. (Emphasis added.) Cong. Globe, 37th Cong., 3d Sess., 952—958. principal Reference cases, Cato Bros. Toepleman McNinch.

Category: 7