Check For Weed
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.19.10
In Agredano v. U.S. (Feb. 17, 2010), the Federal Circuit reversed the Court of Federal Claims decision that Customs and Border Protection breached an implied-in-fact warranty when it sold a car at auction containing concealed marijuana, drugs that ultimately resulted in the purchaser spending a year in a Mexican prison. The Federal Circuit held there was no implied-in-fact warranty that the car did not contain contraband, finding there was no meeting of the minds required to form such a warranty because Customs' regulatory duty to remove contraband from the forfeited vehicle did not create a contractual obligation and the agency had expressly disclaimed any and all warranties at the auction.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
