Appeals Court Affirms Dismissal of False Claims Suit Against Perennial Candidate Steve Lonegan
A New Jersey appeals court ruled that Teaneck political activist William Brennan lacks standing to sue former Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Lonegan under the state's False Claims Act.
April 27, 2018 at 06:11 PM
4 minute read
A New Jersey appeals court ruled that a Teaneck political activist lacks standing to sue former Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Lonegan under the state's False Claims Act.
A three-judge Appellate Division panel, in an April 27 published decision, affirmed a ruling that William Brennan could not pursue a qui tam action against Lonegan, a former Bogota mayor known for his very conservative political stances.
In his lawsuit, Brennan alleged that Lonegan improperly received $2.7 million in matching funds from the state Election Law Enforcement Commission during the 2009 gubernatorial primary because he failed to disclose his membership in Americans for Prosperity, a conservative political action group.
It was Brennan who also sought, unsuccessfully, to push official misconduct charges on Republican Gov. Chris Christie. Brennan alleged that Christie knew about the September 2013 George Washington Bridge lane closures, leading to the Bridgegate scandal, while they were underway. Bergen County Assignment Judge Bonnie Mizdol ultimately ruled that there was no conflict of interest when the prosecutor's office refused to refer the complaint to a grand jury.
In the Lonegan case, the Appellate Division agreed with a trial judge who had ruled that Brennan lacked standing because ELEC already had investigated the allegations against Lonegan and dismissed them, and because Brennan based his claim on information that was already publicly available, specifically, ELEC reports and media reports.
“Defendant argues plaintiff's complaint is barred … because plaintiff lacks any direct knowledge of the alleged false claims and relies solely on public information,” wrote Appellate Division Judge Richard Hoffman. “We find this argument persuasive.”
Appellate Division Judges Susan Reisner and Jessica Mayer joined in the ruling.
“The record clearly shows plaintiff is not the original source of the information supporting the allegations in the complaint,” Hoffman said. “Plaintiff lacks standing because the matter raised in the complaint was publicly known, investigated, and decided before he filed his FCA complaint.”
He added that Brennan “is not permitted to use the FCA to circumvent or re-litigate a commission decision he disputes.”
Under the New Jersey Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Reporting Act, candidates seeking matching funds must state on their applications that they are not involved with issues-advocacy groups.
Lonegan allegedly failed to disclose his involvement with Americans for Prosperity. ELEC stopped giving funds to Lonegan in February 2009 after a series of media reports about the issue. After an investigation, ELEC resumed giving matching funds to Lonegan in March 2009.
Lonegan eventually lost his primary bid to Christie, who went on to win the general election and his 2013 re-election bid.
Lonegan also ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2005, and lost to Democrat Cory Booker in the 2014 campaign for U.S. Senate. He also lost to U.S. Rep. Thomas MacArthur in the Republican primary.
He currently is a candidate in the primary for this year's election for the Fifth Congressional District.
Brennan's attorney, Donald Burke, who heads a firm in Brick, said the Attorney General's Office should agree to intervene and revive the lawsuit.
“This is intended to advance the important public policy of transparency in election financing,” Burke said. “Bill Brennan, on behalf of the state of New Jersey, sought recovery of the $2.7 million in public campaign funds Lonegan received, presenting facts showing Lonegan's participation in Americans for Prosperity, an issue advocacy organization.”
Lonegan's attorney, Woodbridge solo Steve Polinsky, said the appeals court “set a clear standard for the type of knowledge necessary to support a complaint under the False Claims Act.”
“ELEC has exclusive jurisdiction over reported act violations,” Polinsky said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAppellate Div. Follows Fed Reasoning on Recusal for Legislator-Turned-Judge
4 minute readChiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
5 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
7 minute read'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
Trending Stories
- 1Hit by Mail Truck: Man Agrees to $1.85M Settlement for Spinal Injuries
- 2Anticipating a New Era of 'Extreme Vetting,' Big Law Immigration Attys Prep for Demand Surge
- 3Deal Watch: What Dealmakers Are Thankful for in 2024
- 4'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
- 5Attorney Sanctioned for Not Exercising Ordinary Care: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250