The Damages Imposed by the FCA Are Not Punitive The County Defendants argue that even if the County is a “person” under § 3729, the County is immune from suit under the FCA because the act imposes punitive damages. The Supreme Court has held that municipalities are immune from punitive damages in § 1983 suits. See City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc., 453 U.S. 247, 271, 101 S.Ct. 2748, 69 L.Ed.2d 616 (1981). The Court found that imposing punitive liability on municipalities does not fulfill the traditional purposes of punitive damages, deterrence and retribution. Id. 453 U.S. at 267-71, 101 S.Ct. 2748. Defendants concede that the Supreme Court has held that the FCA is not a punitive statute. See, e.g., United States v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 449, 109 S.Ct. 1892, 104 L.Ed.2d 487 (1989) (<HOLDING>), overruled on other grounds by Hudson v.
holding that suspension of driving privileges is not punishment and does not violate an individuals right not to be subject to double jeopardy or constitute a disproportionate penalty holding that civil forfeitures are neither punishment nor criminal for purposes of the double jeopardy clause holding that a delinquency proceeding places a juvenile in jeopardy for purposes of the double jeopardy clause holding in materially identical circumstances that an administrative license suspension did not constitute punishment for double jeopardy purposes holding that the fcas fixedpenaltyplusdoubledamages provisions does not in most cases constitute punishment for the purposes of double jeopardy