Unfortunate Change To Settlement Fees And Costs Allowability Law
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.21.09
Reversing the ASBCA decision in Tecom, Inc., ASBCA Nos. 53884 et al., 07-2 BCA ¶ 33,674 (Sept. 21, 2007), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit holds in Geren v. Tecom, Inc., No. 2008-1171 (May 19, 2009), that legal fees and costs incurred in connection with settling a private action for employment discrimination unrelated to fraud will be allowable only if the contractor can establish that the private plaintiff had very little likelihood of success on the merits. This ruling, which will be discussed next week at Crowell & Moring's OOPS conference, will greatly complicate the determination of allowable costs and place the responsible government contracting officer in the difficult position of second-guessing each settlement decision.
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.26.24
Starting next week, on April 1st, health care entities in California closing “material change transactions” will be required to notify California’s new Office of Health Care Affordability (“OHCA”) and potentially undergo an extensive review process prior to closing. The new review process will impact a broad range of providers, payers, delivery systems, and pharmacy benefit managers with either a current California footprint or a plan to expand into the California market. While health care service plans in California are already subject to an extensive transaction approval process by the Department of Managed Health Care, other health care entities in California have not been required to file notices of transactions historically, and so the notice requirement will have a significant impact on how health care entities need to structure and close deals in California, and the timing on which closing is permitted to occur.
Client Alert | 11 min read | 03.26.24
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.21.24
Federal District Court Rules Corporate Transparency Act Unconstitutional
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.21.24