Breach Of Good Faith Doesn't Require Malice
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.03.06
The Court of Federal Claims in the unusual factual situation of Agredano v. U.S. (Mar. 27, 2006) took the opportunity to reinforce the growing body of decisional law that a party does not have to show subjective malice or intent to injure by a government employee to be able to recover for breach of good faith and fair dealing duties. In this case, Mexican nationals who bought a car seized by the Customs Service at a forfeiture sale "as is" and were then locked up for a year in Mexico when it was discovered at a traffic checkpoint that the upholstery was stuffed with marijuana stated a valid claim for breach of good faith duties to search the car and make sure it was "legal" before offering it for sale.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.23.25
An ITAR-ly Critical Reminder of Cybersecurity Requirements: DOJ Settles with Swiss Automation, Inc.
Earlier this month, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Swiss Automation Inc., an Illinois-based precision machining company, agreed to pay $421,234 to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act (FCA) by inadequately protecting technical drawings for parts delivered to Department of Defense (DoD) prime contractors. This settlement reflects DOJ's persistent emphasis on cybersecurity compliance across all levels of the defense industrial base, reaching beyond prime contractors to encompass subcontractors and smaller suppliers. The settlement is also a reminder to all contractors not to overlook the often confusing relationship between Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and export-controlled information.
Client Alert | 10 min read | 12.23.25
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.23.25
Record-Setting False Claims Act Settlement Highlights DOJ Commitment to Customs Enforcement
Client Alert | 22 min read | 12.23.25
