Termination Clause Trumps Cost-Sharing
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 01.30.06
The Federal Circuit in Jacobs Eng'g Group, Inc. v. U.S. (Jan. 19, 2006) had before it the interesting scenario of the government terminating a contract with an 80/20 cost share and the contractor insisting that it should get "all" its costs under the termination for convenience clause, not just 80% per the cost share. The court agreed, because the cost share had not been specifically incorporated in the termination clause and the termination had deprived the contractor of his compensating benefit for taking the cost share in the first place, patent rights in the finished work.
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.23.26
On March 13, a Massachusetts federal district court temporarily blocked the Trump Administration from requiring higher education institutions to respond to the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement (“ACTS”) survey — a new data collection effort mandating that institutions disclose detailed admissions information regarding students’ race and sex to the federal government. In Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Department of Education, 1:26-cv-11229 (D. Mass.), the court extended the deadline for institutions to respond to the survey from March 18th to March 25th to allow time to consider the case.
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.23.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 03.23.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.23.26
US Section 301 Investigations: The UK Is in the Crosshairs on Forced Labour — Act Now
