October Term 2004 · Docket 04-169
Does the six-year limit apply to False Claims Act retaliation claims?
The parties dispute whether a six-year or three-year limit bars a worker's retaliation claim.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Hallward-Driemeier argued the statute text supports a six-year limit.
Mr. Hurt stated the statutory text clearly requires a six-year limit.
Justice Stevens questioned if retaliation victims often bring qui tam actions.
Justice Breyer noted the broad business support for the district's position.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 27-37
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the statute of limitations for False Claims Act retaliation suits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 20, 2005.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
What each side wants
The district seeks a six-year limit for the retaliation claim.
The worker seeks a three-year limit for the retaliation claim.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
What each side says
The district argues the statute text mandates a six-year limit.
The worker argues the retaliation claim falls outside the six-year rule.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
What the justices asked
Justice Stevens asked if retaliation victims often bring qui tam actions.
Justice Breyer asked about the practical impact on businesses.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 27-37
Why it matters
The outcome sets the deadline for workers to sue for retaliation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-35 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 27-37
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 13-45 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 13-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 33-54 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 33-54
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.