<p><b>STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP</b><b></b></p> <br /> <p><b> </b></p> <br /> <p>Filed 8/31/06 (this opinion should follow companion case, S123951, also filed 8/31/06)</p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"><b>IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA</b></p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p>STATE OF CALIFORNIA ex rel. )</p> <br /> <p>KAMALA HARRIS, as District )</p> <br /> <p>Attorney, etc., et al., ) </p> <br /> <p> )</p> <br /> <p> Plaintiffs and Appellants, )</p> <br /> <p> ) S131807</p> <br /> <p> v. )</p> <br /> <p> ) Ct.App. 1/4 A095918</p> <br /> <p>PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, LLP, )</p> <br /> <p>et al., )</p> <br /> <p> ) San Francisco County</p> <br /> <p> Defendants and Appellants. ) Super. Ct. No. 993507</p> <br /> <p>_______________________________________ )<u></u></p> <br /> <p><b>Continue from Part I ………</b></p> <br /> <p><b> </b></p> <br /> <p>Allowing public agencies to act as qui tam plaintiffs, however, may encourage some agencies, seeking risky paydays, to employ <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">taxpayer funds</a>, and to divert time and resources from their usual public duties, in order to speculate in qui tam litigation on the sole behalf of other agencies. It may also encourage some <a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">public entities</a>, acting for their own enrichment, to <i>compete</i> with each other in races to the courthouse, or to withhold relevant information from their <a href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">defrauded colleagues</a>, so they can file â€