Limitation of Funds Clause Puts Bite in Termination Recovery
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.30.13
In The Boeing Co. (Dec. 3, 2013), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals served a reminder of the risks Limitation of Funds (LOF) clauses pose for contractors, who normally must assure that funding on their contracts will be adequate not only for work underway but also for recovery of prime and subcontract costs in the event of a termination for convenience. The Board refused to allow recovery of costs incurred in excess of the funded amounts, holding that, if the contractor incurred costs in excess of the allotted funding, "it was a volunteer and did so for its own account."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
A Kansas federal court held that inconsistent enforcement of trade secret rights can defeat a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). In Edelman Financial Engines, LLC v. Mariner Wealth Advisors LLC, No. 2:23-cv-02515-HLT (D. Kan. June 5, 2026), the court applied a selective enforcement theory, holding that when a company does not consistently pursue legal remedies against similarly situated former employees, that inconsistency can be affirmative evidence that it failed to protect its trade secrets. While the selective enforcement theory has appeared in academic hypothetical discussions, the decision appears to be one of the clearest judicial applications of a “selective enforcement” theory in a trade secret case.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
