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 | 3 min read | 11.05.25
On October 29, 2025, the attorneys general of Florida, Texas, Iowa, Nebraska, and Montana (the “State AGs”) jointly issued letters to three sustainability groups asserting that their plastics recycling initiatives may violate state and federal antitrust and consumer protection laws.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.05.25
The EU’s Defense Readiness Roadmap and Omnibus: What Are the Competition Law Implications?
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.03.25
ICE Is Suddenly At The Door: How Retailers, Hospitals, And Hotels Can Survive The Surprise Visitor
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.03.25
