EOD Technology, Inc. v. United States
82 Fed. Cl. 12 | United States Court of Federal Claims | 2008
Holding Summary
An agency's override of an automatic GAO protest stay must be supported by a rational basis showing urgent and compelling circumstances; the override here was arbitrary and capricious because the agency failed to adequately consider whether competitive alternatives existed.
The override determination may not be based simply on the agency's preference to override the stay.
Related Cases
General Services Commission v. Little-Tex Insulation Co.
The State does not waive sovereign immunity from breach-of-contract suits by accepting contract benefits; Chapter 2260's administrative procedure is the exclusive remedy for such claims.
PYCA Industries, Inc. v. Harrison County Waste Water Management District
A wastewater district is a citizen for diversity jurisdiction purposes and a political subdivision entitled to sovereign immunity from tort claims under pre-Pruett Mississippi law.
MCI CONSTRUCTORS, LLC v. City of Greensboro
District court properly confirmed arbitration award finding City entitled to $14.9 million damages; arbitration panel did not exceed its powers and award was not procured by undue means.
Linan-Faye Construction Co., Inc. v. Housing Authority of the City of Camden
District court erred in applying federal common law instead of New Jersey law to interpret the termination for convenience clause, but New Jersey courts would look to federal common law for guidance on this issue.
Blackstone Medical, Inc. D/B/A Orthofix Spinal Implants v. Phoenix Surgicals, LLC
Trial court properly denied motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict on breach of contract and promissory estoppel claims where evidence supported jury findings of wrongful termination and waiver of exclusivity provision.
Textron Defense Systems v. Sheila E. Widnall, Secretary of the Air Force
A contractor under a cost-plus-award-fee contract is not entitled to a pro-rata share of unearned award fees upon termination for convenience, as the award fee clause was expressly exempted from the termination clause and the contractor had no reasonable expectation of receiving fees for unperformed work.