Weekly government relations, benefits, and contract law case summaries, from FindLaw.com.
View this email in your browser
Digest for Week of February 8th, 2017

Government Law Case Summaries


Agility Defense & Government Servs., Inc. v. US

February 6, 2017
Government Contracts
(California Court of Appeal) - In a government contractor's claim for an equitable adjustment arising out of its fixed price indefinite delivery contract with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)’s Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS), the Court of Federal Claims' denial of the claim is reversed where: 1) the Claims Court's findings that DRMS did not inadequately or negligently prepare its estimates and that Agility did not rely on those estimates are clearly erroneous; and 2) Plaintiff’s receipt of scrap sales and the parties' agreement to clause H.19 do not preclude plaintiff from recovering under this claim.
Keep Reading

Beck v. McDonald

February 6, 2017
Consumer Protection Law, Health Law, Military Law, Government Benefits, Cyberspace Law
(United States Fourth Circuit) - In consolidated appeals brought by veterans who received medical treatment and health care at the William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center (Dorn VAMC) against the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Dorn VAMC officials, alleging violations of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. section 552a et seq., and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. section 701 et seq., after two data breaches at the Center compromised their personal information, the district court's dismissal of the actions for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is affirmed where Plaintiffs failed to establish a non-speculative, imminent injury-in-fact for purposes of Article III standing.
Keep Reading

Cuenca v. Cohen

February 6, 2017
Administrative Law, Government Law, Property Law & Real Estate, Tax Law
(California Court of Appeal) - In a case concerning the effects of the elimination of the tax increment and dissolution of the Santa Ana Redevelopment Agency on the five stipulated judgments that required the City to set aside various percentages of the tax increment for low- and moderate-income housing projects, in which plaintiffs sought a writ of mandate to overturn California Department of Finance (DOF)'s determination that approximately $30 million set aside under the stipulated judgments was unencumbered and must be remitted to the county auditor-controller, the trial court's judgment affirming DOF's determination (except for a $3.5 million loan pledged to Habitat for construction of 17 affordable houses) is affirmed where: 1) Habitat has standing to participate in this appeal, and this case is not moot; 2) the stipulated judgments meet the definition of enforceable obligations under the Dissolution Law; 3) DOF's determination that the Dissolution Law requires the turning over of unencumbered moneys to the county auditor-controller does not violate the contract clauses of the United States or California Constitutions; and 4) the Dissolution Law's requirement that unencumbered funds be remitted to the county auditor-controller does not violate Proposition 1A or Proposition 22.
Keep Reading

You are receiving this mailing because you subscribed as *|EMAIL| * to receive newsletters on FindLaw.com. FindLaw's case summaries are copyrighted material and are not intended for republication without prior approval. You may, however, freely redistribute this email in its entirety. 

Questions or concerns about our Newsletter layout or content? Contact us!

Our mailing address is: 800 West California Avenue 2nd Floor, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Unsubscribe from this newsletter        Unsubscribe from all FindLaw newsletters

Copyright © 2017 FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.