1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Charles Baek

Charles Baek

Partner
Partner
Y2JhZWtAY3Jvd2VsbC5jb20=
VCard
VCard

Areas of Focus

Overview

Charles Baek, a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group, serves government contracts clients of all sizes, with an emphasis on claims/recovery practice. His practice focuses on litigation before the boards of contract appeals (ASBCA and CBCA), as well as the Court of Federal Claims and litigation/arbitration for prime-sub disputes. Charles also provides counseling to clients on compliance, contract administration, and cost accounting, among other topics. His relevant experience includes:

  • Served as counsel in the $13 billion Affordable Care Act “risk corridors” litigation at the U.S. Supreme Court.
  • Represented a major defense contractor in cost-related litigation before the Federal Circuit, with claim valued in excess of $250M.
  • Represents major defense contractors in cost accounting and contract disputes litigation before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals and Civilian Board of Contract Appeals.
  • Represents US contractors in disputes with foreign entities involving US government contracts.
  • Represents construction companies in disputes involving federal construction projects.

Career & Education

    • The George Washington University Law School, J.D., 2015
    • University of British Columbia, B.Com., 2011
    • The George Washington University Law School, J.D., 2015
    • University of British Columbia, B.Com., 2011

    • District of Columbia
    • New York
    • Supreme Court of the United States
    • District of Columbia
    • New York
    • Supreme Court of the United States

    • Korean
    • Korean

Charles's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.17.26

COFC Holds that USAID Contractors Properly Pleaded Breach of Contract by Improper Mass Termination in Bad Faith/Abuse of Discretion

In Danziger et al. v. U.S., No. 25-cv-1241 (Fed. Cl. Apr. 10, 2026) (a Crowell & Moring case), the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) denied the government’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking breach of contract damages for improper terminations in bad faith and/or abuse of discretion. The case involves hundreds of contractors for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), who were terminated in 2025 in connection with the dismantling of USAID. The government sought to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim, arguing that the complaint failed to sufficiently plead bad faith or abuse of discretion. The court rejected these arguments, noting that the complaint was “replete with allegations implicating bad faith,” and specifically rejected the “peculiar notion” “that governmental misconduct is immunized when a contracting officer acts pursuant to directives from higher-ranking officials.” The court also held that the government’s payment of certain termination costs was no defense to the contractors’ breach claim and confirmed that an improper termination for convenience entitles contractors to termination costs as well as breach damages....

View All Insights

Representative Matters

  • Represents a major defense contractor in an ASBCA claim litigation.
  • Represents multiple healthcare-industry companies in connection with claims litigations regarding the Affordable Care Act.
  • Represents a major technology company in an internal investigation regarding potential FCA violations.
  • Represents a major insurance company in an internal investigation regarding potential FCA violations.
  • Represents a government contractor in connection with a CDA claim litigation.
  • Represents a government contractor in connection with alleged Small Business Act (SBA) violations.
  • Counseled a major aviation-industry company relating to clearance issues.

Charles's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.17.26

COFC Holds that USAID Contractors Properly Pleaded Breach of Contract by Improper Mass Termination in Bad Faith/Abuse of Discretion

In Danziger et al. v. U.S., No. 25-cv-1241 (Fed. Cl. Apr. 10, 2026) (a Crowell & Moring case), the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) denied the government’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking breach of contract damages for improper terminations in bad faith and/or abuse of discretion. The case involves hundreds of contractors for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), who were terminated in 2025 in connection with the dismantling of USAID. The government sought to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim, arguing that the complaint failed to sufficiently plead bad faith or abuse of discretion. The court rejected these arguments, noting that the complaint was “replete with allegations implicating bad faith,” and specifically rejected the “peculiar notion” “that governmental misconduct is immunized when a contracting officer acts pursuant to directives from higher-ranking officials.” The court also held that the government’s payment of certain termination costs was no defense to the contractors’ breach claim and confirmed that an improper termination for convenience entitles contractors to termination costs as well as breach damages....

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.17.26

COFC Holds that USAID Contractors Properly Pleaded Breach of Contract by Improper Mass Termination in Bad Faith/Abuse of Discretion

Firm News | 7 min read | 01.09.26

Crowell & Moring Elects 15 New Partners, Promotes One to Senior Counsel and 26 to Counsel

Speaking Engagement | 01.08.26

"What Will the New Year Bring in 2026?" Crowell & Moring Webinar.

Blog Post | 12.17.25

ASBCA’s FY 2025 Report – A Look at the Numbers

View All Insights

Practices

Industries

Charles's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.17.26

COFC Holds that USAID Contractors Properly Pleaded Breach of Contract by Improper Mass Termination in Bad Faith/Abuse of Discretion

In Danziger et al. v. U.S., No. 25-cv-1241 (Fed. Cl. Apr. 10, 2026) (a Crowell & Moring case), the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) denied the government’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking breach of contract damages for improper terminations in bad faith and/or abuse of discretion. The case involves hundreds of contractors for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), who were terminated in 2025 in connection with the dismantling of USAID. The government sought to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim, arguing that the complaint failed to sufficiently plead bad faith or abuse of discretion. The court rejected these arguments, noting that the complaint was “replete with allegations implicating bad faith,” and specifically rejected the “peculiar notion” “that governmental misconduct is immunized when a contracting officer acts pursuant to directives from higher-ranking officials.” The court also held that the government’s payment of certain termination costs was no defense to the contractors’ breach claim and confirmed that an improper termination for convenience entitles contractors to termination costs as well as breach damages....

View All Insights