EMPLOYEE AGREES TO CIVIL SETTLEMENT AFTER FALSIFYING APPLICATION FOR ECONOMIC INJURY DISASTER LOAN ADVANCECivil Settlement Agreement • October 2nd, 2024
An Amtrak train attendant based in Miami, Florida, signed a civil settlement agreement on September 2, 2024, with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida. The employee was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution and a $2,500 penalty. Our investigation found that the employee submitted a false claim for an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Advance of $10,000 for an alleged agriculture business, which operated out of his home. We interviewed the employee, who admitted he did not own an agricultural business and that his loan application contained false information. As a result, he received an EIDL loan advance in the amount of $10,000 to which he was not entitled.
ContractCivil Settlement Agreement • August 16th, 2011 • Supreme Industries Inc • Truck & bus bodies • Arizona
This civil settlement agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between The Armored Group, LLC (“TAG”), a Nevada limited liability company, and Supreme Indiana Operations, Inc., a Delaware corporation, successor to Supreme Corporation, a Texas corporation, and Supreme Corporation of Texas, a Texas corporation (collectively “Supreme”). TAG and Supreme are the parties (“Parties”) to this Agreement.
EMPLOYEE AGREES TO CIVIL SETTLEMENT RELATED TO THE RECEIPT OF PAYROLL PROTECTION PROGRAM LOANCivil Settlement Agreement • April 4th, 2023
An Amtrak electrical journeyman, based in Washington, D.C., signed a civil settlement agreement on March 23, 2023, with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida, and agreed to pay $23,360 in restitution and a $5,640 penalty. Our investigation found that the employee submitted an application containing false statements and information to a lender backed by the Small Business Administration to qualify for a Payroll Protection Program loan. As a result, the employee received $20,800 in federal CARES Act funds to which she was not entitled.
EXHIBIT 10.1 HERLEY INDUSTRIES, INC. CIVIL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT I. PARTIES This Civil Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into by and among: (A) the United States of America ("United States"), acting by and through its authorized counsel, on...Civil Settlement Agreement • May 8th, 2008 • Herley Industries Inc /New • Search, detection, navagation, guidance, aeronautical sys
AMENDMENT TO CIVIL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTCivil Settlement Agreement • August 16th, 2011 • Supreme Industries Inc • Truck & bus bodies
This Amendment to Civil Settlement Agreement (“Amendment”) dated May 25, 2011, is made by and between The Armored Group, LLC (“TAG”), a Nevada limited liability company, and Supreme Indiana Operations, Inc., a Delaware corporation, successor to Supreme Corporation, a Texas corporation, and Supreme Corporation of Texas, a Texas corporation (collectively “Supreme”). TAG and Supreme are the parties (“Parties”) to this Amendment. These same parties are the signatories to the Civil Settlement Agreement dated May 25, 2011.
The above named parties having reached an agreement to resolve their dispute this dayCivil Settlement Agreement • May 23rd, 2007
Nothing in this agreement shall be deemed to waive or conflict with the duties and responsibilities set forth in Rule No. 229.1 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure regarding the payment of settlement amount and sanctions.
Guidelines Regarding Civil Settlement Agreement April 4, 2012Civil Settlement Agreement • April 11th, 2012
On March 12, 2012, the United States Government (United States), many State Attorneys General, and various mortgage servicers entered into civil settlements agreements (Settlements) pursuant to which they settled certain claims related to previous mortgage servicing activity. On April 4, 2012, these were signed by the United States District Court of the District of Columbia. In addition to monetary penalties, the mortgage servicers each agreed to perform Consumer Redress Activities. In connection with the Settlements, the Department of the Treasury is hereby issuing guidelines regarding which Consumer Redress Activities may be considered “qualified
ContractCivil Settlement Agreement • September 30th, 2020
This Civil Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into by and among: (A) the United States of America, acting through the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York and on behalf of the Office of Inspector General (“OIG-HHS”) of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) and the Defense Health Agency (“DHA”) on behalf of the TRICARE Program (collectively, the “United States”); (B) Dougherty Pharmacy, Inc., and Jennifer Caloia (collectively, “Caloia”); and (C) Colin Valenta (“Relator”). The United States, Caloia and Relator are hereafter collectively referred to as “the Parties.”
Effective 5/1/2024Civil Settlement Agreement • May 2nd, 2024
CONTRACTOR PAYS OVER $74,000 TO RESOLVE CONTRACT BILLING ISSUESCivil Settlement Agreement • March 31st, 2023
A civil settlement agreement was finalized between the United States Department of Justice and an Amtrak contractor on February 14, 2023. The contractor agreed to pay Amtrak $54,567 out of retainage held by Amtrak and an additional $9,822 to the United States for overbilling overhead rates above the maximum allowed for work performed on the New Jersey High Speed Rail Improvement Program from 2013 to 2017. Separate from the civil settlement agreement, the contractor also paid Amtrak $10,561 for overbilling overhead rates on the same project during the period from 2018 to 2020.
