Chutzpah Goes Unrewarded
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.24.06
The contractor in Armour of Am. v. U.S. (CFC Feb. 14, 2006) alleged "no cause of action" when it argued that it should not have been terminated for default when it was obvious from its offer that it could not meet the mandatory requirements of the RFP/contract and the FAR required the agency to reject nonconforming offers. Still alive, though, is the issue of whether the agency breached its good faith duties by making the award with actual knowledge of the nonconformity and then defaulting early on in the program.
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 06.09.26
Is Stock-a-palooza Over? Supreme Court allows SEC to Pursue Disgorgement
On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) can continue to pursue disgorgement as an equitable remedy in securities fraud cases without showing pecuniary loss by investors. The Court’s ruling in Sripetch v. SEC resolves a split between the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which concluded that the SEC must demonstrate pecuniary loss, and the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First and Ninth Circuits, which declined to require such a showing.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.09.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 06.09.26
Client Alert | 11 min read | 06.08.26
