"Should Have Known" Standard Applied to CDA Statute of Limitations
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.28.13
In what seems likely to be a major landmark in the evolving interpretation of the CDA statute of limitations, the ASBCA has held that the statute began to run in 1999, when a DCMA price analyst had all the information the government needed to recognize that it had a claim for an alleged CAS violation, even though the responsible CO may not have been aware of the claim until an audit report was issued in 2006. The ASBCA held that, in the absence of any evidence of trickery or concealment, the government "should have known" that it had a claim based on the contractor's 1999 cost proposal that appeared to be inconsistent with its disclosed accounting practice and that the government could not unilaterally extend the statute of limitations by failing to perform an audit that put the CO on actual notice that there might be a claim.
Insights
Client Alert | 15 min read | 08.20.25
In this eighth alert in our weekly series on the EU Pharma Package, we continue our overview of initiatives with respect to security of supply and shortage prevention and mitigation. Our last alert looked at how the Pharma Package seeks to address these issues. However, the Pharma Package does not exist in isolation, and in this alert we will discuss the interplay between its measures and those contained in other important EU initiatives such as the proposed Critical Medicines Act (CMA), and the Medicinal Countermeasures Strategy and the EU Stockpiling Strategy.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.19.25
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.19.25
Forged Faces, Real Liability: Deepfake Laws Take Effect in Washington State and Pennsylvania
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.19.25
