Board Rejects Claim Based on Certain Fiscal Law Violations
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.12.17
In Parsons Government Services, Inc. (ASBCA No. 60663, May 3, 2017), the Board dismissed Parsons’ $21 million claim because both contractual allegations turned on fiscal law provisions that did not entitle Parsons to relief. First, Parsons argued that the contract was void ab initio, entitling Parsons to quantum meruit, because “the government should have awarded the contract as a construction contract appropriating MILCON funds [pursuant to 10 U.S.C. §§ 2801 et seq.] instead of a supply and services contract using O&M funds.” Second, Parsons argued that the government “violated the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing by depriving Parsons of its reasonable expectations” of the necessary Congressional oversight and more stringent terms consistent with a MILCON-funded contract….” The Board rejected both arguments under Federal Circuit precedent, finding that the statutory MILCON provision underlying Parsons’ claim did not provide a private right of action for contractors to sue because the primary intended beneficiary of the statute was the government.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.05.25
On October 29, 2025, the attorneys general of Florida, Texas, Iowa, Nebraska, and Montana (the “State AGs”) jointly issued letters to three sustainability groups asserting that their plastics recycling initiatives may violate state and federal antitrust and consumer protection laws.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.05.25
The EU’s Defense Readiness Roadmap and Omnibus: What Are the Competition Law Implications?
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.03.25
ICE Is Suddenly At The Door: How Retailers, Hospitals, And Hotels Can Survive The Surprise Visitor
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.03.25


