All Alerts & Newsletters

Contracting Authority Analyzed In 3 Cases

Jun.16.2006

In a spate of recent decisions by different Court of Federal Claims judges, the proper scope of contracting authority is closely analyzed. In Brunner v. U.S. (May 2, 2001, http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Wolski/
06/WOLSKI.Brunner.pdf
), Judge Wolski provides a treatise that concludes that apparent authority, contrary to all reports, is alive and well in government contracts and is only limited by publicly available laws and regulations that restrict the government agent's power to contract; in Arakaki v. U.S. (May 30, 2006, http://www.uscfc.
uscourts.gov/Opinions/Hewitt/06/HEWITT.Arakaki.MSJ.pdf
), Judge Hewitt disagrees; and in Telenor Satellite Servs., Inc. v. U.S. (June 2, 2006, http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Baskir/06/BASKIR.Telenor.pdf), handled by C&M, Judge Baskir discusses both implied authority and ratification when finding both for a bailment agreement.

Email Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Google+

For more information, please contact the professional(s) listed below, or your regular Crowell & Moring contact.

Frederick (Rick) W. Claybrook Jr.
Partner – Washington, D.C.
Phone: +1 202.624.2695
Email: rclaybrook@crowell.com
Peter Eyre
Partner – Washington, D.C.
Phone: +1 202.624.2807
Email: peyre@crowell.com