CO'S Opinion Due No Deference On Statutory Application
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 07.30.04
Continuing a recent string of successful bid protests, the Court of Federal Claims in Miss. Dept. of Rehab. Servs. v. U.S. (June 4, 2004), finds that the Navy has improperly refused to give the blind a statutory preference in a procurement for operation of a galley. Of particular interest, Judge Baskir rejects the more deferential standard some judges have used in similar cases and rules that no deference is owed to the Contracting Officer's application of the statutory language, considering the matter de novo.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26
