Subcontract Unenforceable When Violates SBA Requirements
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.30.10
In Morris-Griffin Corp. v. C & L Servs. Corp. (Aug. 16, 2010), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found that a subcontract between a small business prime contractor and its large business subcontractor was unenforceable because it violated the SBA's size regulations and limitations on subcontracting. After finding that the two companies were affiliated and that the large business subcontractor was seeking to enforce a subcontract under which it was entitled to greater than 50% of the costs incurred for personnel, the court concluded that the prime had falsely certified that it was a small business and that its contract awarded under an 8(a) set-aside had been "conceived in fraud," noting further that such set-asides "are susceptible to finagling."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.24.25
On October 23rd, the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) containing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“ANOPR”) with principles for all large load interconnections across the US, including those co-located with generating facilities.[1] Significantly, the Secretary of Energy states that the interconnection of large loads to the transmission system “falls squarely” within FERC’s jurisdiction, thus weighing in on a dispute that has been pending before FERC for over a year. This move appears to be a reaction to the continued pendency before FERC of the colocation dockets[2] and a technical conference on colocation held almost a year ago.[3]
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.24.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.23.25
Are You Ready for the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act? Key Changes for Businesses
Client Alert | 8 min read | 10.23.25
Ransomware on the Rise: The Expanding Role of Legal Counsel in Incident Response
