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 | 5 min read | 07.20.26
On July 6, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published an Interim Final Rule (IFR) setting up a new federal framework that allows state, local, Tribal, and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement and correctional agencies to detect, track, and, in some cases, disable or seize drones. The rule directly affects SLTT agencies looking to stand up counter-drone programs, as well as drone and counter-drone technology companies whose products will be subject to federal review and approval. Although the IFR bypassed the Administrative Procedure Act’s standard notice-and-comment process on good cause grounds — citing the statutory 180-day deadline and urgent public safety needs — the rule is already legally binding and effective as of July 1, 2026. The Departments are nonetheless accepting post-promulgation comments through September 4, 2026.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.20.26
QFMA Introduces International Licensing Regime for Financial Services Firms
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.17.26
Client Alert | 2 min read | 07.15.26
CMMC Phase II Suspension Requires Reconsideration of Such Requirements in Solicitations
