No. 23-1694

UNITED STATES, ex rel. Frederic P. Zotos and COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, ex rel. Frederic P. Zotos,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

TOWN OF HINGHAM; ROGER FERNANDES, individually and as former Town Engineer; TOM MAYO, individually and as Town Administrator; TED C. ALEXIADES, individually and as former Town Administrator, former Town Accountant/Finance Director; KEVIN E. PAICOS, individually and as former Town Administrator; and SUSAN NICKERSON, individually and as Town Accountant,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Nathaniel M. Gorton, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Barron, Chief Judge, Selya and Rikelman, Circuit Judges.

Frederic P. Zotos, pro se, on brief for appellants. Kerry T. Ryan, Bogle, DeAscentis & Coughlin, Douglas I. Louison, Joseph A. Padolsky, and Louison, Costello, Condon & Pfaff, LLP on brief for appellees. April 8, 2024 SELYA, Circuit Judge. An old motto teaches that "if at first you don't succeed, try, try again." Thomas H. Palmer, The Teacher's Manual 223 (1840). Whatever virtue such unfailing persistence may have in everyday life, it is an uncertain blueprint. This case, in which relator-appellant Frederic P. Zotos tries once again to vindicate a purported grievance with municipal authorities, illustrates the point.

I

We briefly rehearse the relevant facts and travel of the case. Because this appeal follows the district court's grant of a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), we draw the facts from the plaintiff's complaint and its attachments. See Lanza v. Fin. Indus. Regul. Auth., 953 F.3d 159, 161 (1st Cir. 2020).

Relator Frederic P. Zotos is an attorney residing in Cohasset, Massachusetts. The Town of Hingham (the Town) is a municipality in Massachusetts, and the other defendants all were officials and administrators of the Town at times relevant to the complaint.

On multiple prior occasions, Zotos has been involved in litigation — either as a plaintiff or an attorney — against the

- 3 - Town concerning the legality of various speed limit signs posted within its jurisdiction.1 Time and again, the Town has prevailed.

The latest skirmish in this long-running battle commenced on September 24, 2019, when Zotos filed a qui tam complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on behalf of the United States of America and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts under the federal False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729(a)(1)(A)-(C), and the Massachusetts False Claims Act (MFCA), M.G.L. ch. 12, §§ 5B(a)(1)-(3). The complaint first alleges that the Town and its officials posted speed limit signs and advisory speed plaques that did not comply with (and in some cases violated) applicable federal and state laws and regulations. As of March 2012 — according to the complaint — the Town had posted at least twenty-six such speed limit signs and at least thirty-four such advisory speed plaques. The complaint further alleges that the Town applied for and received reimbursements for these purportedly ultra vires speed limit signs and advisory speed plaques from both the federal government and the Commonwealth. Building on this foundation, the complaint

The reader who hungers for greater details may wish to 1 consult the following earlier opinions: Zotos v. Town of