Presolicitation Statements Not Dispositive Of Whether Mod Is Beyond Scope
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.28.05
An agency's presolicitation statement that it did not initially intend a contract to include certain work did not bar the agency from later adding that work, according to the Court of Federal Claims in HDM Corp. v. United States (Dec. 14, 2005). Whether a contract was amended beyond its scope depends upon the breadth of the stated objectives of the solicitation, whether bidders were told that work could be added, and the nature of the added work, so early agency statements are not dispositive, the court held in this case successfully litigated by Crowell & Moring.
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 06.16.26
What United States v. Bankman-Fried Means for Health Care Fraud Defense
On the surface, United States v. Bankman-Fried is a case about the collapse of a cryptocurrency exchange. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s recent opinion — affirming Samuel Bankman-Fried’s conviction on seven counts of fraud and conspiracy — carries important lessons that extend well beyond the world of digital assets.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
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
