Ninth Circuit gives the relator a glimmer of hope in Stoner v. Santa Clara
The Ninth Circuit yesterday, gave relator John David Stoner, a glimmer of hope in his qui tam case, USA Ex. Rel. Stoner v. Santa Clara, No. 04-15984 (9th Cir. Sept.7, 2007). This is not to say that this will be a walk in the park for this pro se relator. Circuit Judge Sandra S. Ikuta wrote a great opinion the Opinion for the Ninth Circuit. Giving both sides minor victories.
In Stoner v. Santa Clara, John David Stoner alleges that that the defendant, Santa Clara County Office of Education, East Side High School District an three Santa Clara County Office of Education Employees, Colleen B. Wilcox, Joe Fimani, and David Wong, induced the government to give money for educational programs, based on false certifications in compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Act.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, the District Court's earlier premise that John David Stoner can't bring this qui tam action pro se to the federal court on behalf of the government. Although, Mr. Stoner is a licensed attorney, he is not a member of the State Bar of California and does not have admission to go before the District Court for the Northern District of California. The Ninth Circuit held that Mr. Stoner must secure counsel or obtain pro hac vice admission if he is to continue with his qui tam case before the District Court.
However, on a positive note. the Ninth Circuit agreed with Mr. Stoner that state officials sued for damages in their individual capacities are "persons" within the meaning of 31 U.S.C. 3729. The Eleventh Amendment does not ban such suits. In the event, Mr. Stoner has the appropriate status before the court or appropriate legal representation, the case can be heard by the District Court regarding the qui tam claims and allegations against the three Santa Clara County Office of Education Employees, Colleen B. Wilcox, Joe Fimani, and David Wong.
The ball is John David Stoner's court. How he returns his serve, will be up to him. Since only Mr. Stoner knows the driving force behind this qui tam claim in the first place, the public must wait and see if he will take this ruling and return a serve with full force and take all the necessary steps to win this case or rather end the case now, if he was only trying to prove the point that he could bring the case before the court in the first place.
Time will tell.
