Contracting Authority Analyzed In 3 Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.16.06
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), 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), Judge Hewitt disagrees; and in Telenor Satellite Servs., Inc. v. U.S. (June 2, 2006), handled by C&M, Judge Baskir discusses both implied authority and ratification when finding both for a bailment agreement.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 14 min read | 05.03.24
On April 24, 2024, President Biden signed into law the National Security Supplemental fiscal package, which includes significant new sanctions and export controls authorities. Although the U.S. foreign aid commitments for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan headline the new law, it also (1) expands the statute of limitations for U.S. sanctions violations; (2) includes new authorities for the President to coordinate sanctions efforts with the European Union and the United Kingdom; (3) expands sanctions and export controls on Iran (including some targeted at Chinese financial institutions); and (4) includes new sanctions authorities targeting terror groups.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.03.24
EEOC’s New “Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace” Hits Hot-Button Issues
Client Alert | 11 min read | 05.03.24
FDA Moves Forward on Laboratory Developed Tests while Stakeholders and Congress Weigh Next Steps
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.03.24
