Pre-Award Key Personnel Departure Creates Catch-22 – Do I Tell or Not?
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.24.15
In Pioneering Evolution, LLC (Dec. 8, 2015), GAO agreed with the Navy's rejection of an offer as technically unacceptable for failure to satisfy a material solicitation requirement when the protester had notified the Navy after submission of final proposal revisions (FPRs) but before award that one of its proposed key personnel had accepted another position and was no longer available to perform. GAO asserted that the protestor was required to notify the Navy but that it had no right to substitute a qualified replacement, confirming that offerors are at risk if they inform an agency of key personnel departures post-FPR.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26
