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 | 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
