Novation Trap For The Unwary
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.04.11
In Raytheon Co. v. U.S. (Jan. 26, 2011), the Court of Federal Claims held that a contractor's claim for the pension cost adjustment due under CAS 413 for pension plans with funding deficits at the time of a "segment closing" could be barred by the standard language required in novation agreements providing that the contractor "waives any claims and rights against the Government that it now has or may have in the future in connection with the [novated] contracts." Because the Government takes the position that its agreement to novate contracts is completely within the untrammeled discretion of the Government, the Government could effectively negate the requirements of CAS 413 if this decision is correct by refusing to novate contracts unless the contractor agrees to waive its rights to an adjustment under CAS 413.
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
