Posts tagged with: "8"
Results 1 - 20 of 1,628
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jun 2011, 8:58 pm by emagraken
Order in Council #191 was approved by the Ministry of the Attorney General on May 26, 2011.  This order comes into force on July 1, 2011 and makes various amendments to the BC Supreme Court Civil Rules. I have a copy of the order and am happy to share it with anyone who contacts me and requests a copy. None of the changes are drastic and they comprise of little more than minor adjustments.  A non-exhaustive list of the highlights are as follows: Obligations for responding to a lawsuit are… [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 6:46 am by emagraken
One of the ongoing trends in civil litigation is a trend to greater pre-trial disclosure.  Reasons for judgement were released last week by the BC Supreme Court, Victoria Registry, addressing this principle finding that caselaw should be disclosed ahead of Chambers Applications to avoid “chambers by ambush“. Last week’s case (De Corde v. De Corde) involved a motor vehicle collision.  The Defendant brought a short notice application to compel the Plaintiff to be assessed by a… [read post]
25 Apr 2013, 8:00 am by Steven Koprince
Last month, I wrote about the successful 8(a) program appeal filed by Gearhart Construction Services.  In its decision, SBA OHA held that the SBA had misevaluated Gearhart on the “social disadvantage” factor, including by holding Gearhart to a too-high standard of proof.  SBA OHA ordered the SBA to correct its errors and take another look at Gearhart’s application. Now I can report that Gearhart’s story has a happy ending.  On April 11, the SBA notified… [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 1:08 pm by emagraken
Two of the changes in the new BC Supreme Court Civil Rules are the requirement under Rule 8-1(4) that pre-trial applications be brought using Form 32 and that parties are generally prohibited from providing the Court with written arguments during applications.  Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Victoria Registry, addressing how much detail parties should include when filling out Form 32. In today’s case (Zecher v. Josh) the Plaintiff was injured in a motor… [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 1:28 pm by emagraken
Last month the BC Supreme Court released reasons indicating that parties ought to use Form 32 to provide the Court with “full disclosure of the argument to be made in chambers”. It is good practice to do so because Rule 8-1(16) of the New Rules prohibits written arguments (other than those set out in Form 32) from being relied on in Chambers Applications estimated to take less than 2 hours.  Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Victoria Registry, demonstrating… [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 1:08 pm by Steven Koprince
A participant in the SBA’s 8(a) program must obtain the SBA’s prior approval before switching its business structure–or else. Case in point: recently, an 8(a) participant was terminated from the 8(a) program because it switched its corporate structure from a corporation to a limited liability company without the SBA’s prior approval. The decision of the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals in Brighter Days and Nites, LLC, SBA No. BDPT-498 (2013), involved an 8(a)… [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 10:21 am by Steven Koprince
8(a) joint ventures are not 8(a) program participants, according to a recent (and commonsense) decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals. In its decision, SBA rejected a joint venture’s argument that its 8(a) joint venture agreement was essentially an 8(a) program application, drawing a jurisdictional decision between 8(a) program certification and 8(a) joint venture agreement approval. SBA OHA’s decision in National Sourcing Specialists, LLC, SBA No. BDPE-502 (2013) involved a… [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 8:15 am by Steven Koprince
A Maryland man has pleaded guilty in an 8(a) fraud case involving a company that received more than $52 million in 8(a) contracts to which it was not entitled. According to a Department of Justice press release, Vernon Smith pleaded guilty to charges that he (not the company’ s disadvantaged majority owner) exercised complete control over the company’s day-to-day management and long term decision making. The DOJ alleges that Smith arranged for Anthony Wright, an African American who was… [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 8:04 am by Steven Koprince
A participant in the SBA’s 8(a) Program was appropriately terminated because the company’s disadvantaged owner took another full-time job without the SBA’s permission. The recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals decision upholding the termination is an important reminder of the limitations on outside employment for 8(a) owners–as well as a reminder of the importance to 8(a) firms of ongoing honesty and forthrightness with the SBA. SBA OHA’s decision in ME Cubed… [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 8:48 am by Steven Koprince
After prevailing in its SBA OHA 8(a) appeal, a St. Louis-based communications and electrical construction contractor has been certified as a participant in the SBA’s 8(a) program. The SBA’s decision to certify Innovet, Inc. shows the importance of pursuing an appeal of an unreasonable SBA 8(a) denial–and offers hope that the SBA is learning from its recent string of defeats at SBA OHA. Innovet is owned and controlled by a service-disabled veteran, Charles McCarty.  Innovet… [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 1:15 pm by emagraken
Earlier this year Master Bouck released reasons for judgement discussing the Rule 8-1(16) prohibition of written argument in Chambers applicaitons finding as follows: Since July 1, 2010 and pursuant to Rule 8-1(16), a written argument may only be presented to the court if the application consumes more than two hours.  There is no discretion under the Rule to receive written argument in other circumstances.  This application was estimated to be heard in 35 minutes but took one hour. Thus, no… [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 10:07 am by Steven Koprince
An 8(a) firm’s failure to actively pursue its business has caused the SBA to terminate the firm from the 8(a) program. Upholding the termination, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals noted that if an 8(a) firm’s fails to make substantial and sustained efforts to obtain business, the SBA is justified in kicking the firm out of the 8(a) program. SBA OHA 8(a) appeal decision in SPARCcom & Associates, BDPT-501 (2013) involved the 8(a) certification of SPARCcom & Associates.… [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 3:59 pm by Cal Law
[Dan Levine]Never a good sign when a judge walks off the bench while a lawyer is in mid-sentence. Yet, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe partner Stephen Bomse should have been too surprised by Chief Judge Vaughn Walker’s exit Tuesday: Walker had been hammering Bomse throughout a hearing on whether groups like the ACLU would have to turn over documents to the proponents of Prop 8. This discovery mess – which threatens to delay a final Walker ruling on the constitutionality of Prop 8 – commenced in… [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 7:32 am by emagraken
Useful reasons for judgement were released yesterday (Stockbrugger v. Bigney)  by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, finding that parties can apply for a Case Planning Conference Order by consent even if they have not had a Case Planning Conference.  While such a power is not set out expressly in the Rules of Court Mr. Justice Macaulay relied on the principle of proportionality to justify this result.  The Court provide the following helpful reasons: [2] Even though the Supreme Court… [read post]
29 May 2013, 10:54 am by Steven Koprince
A contractor was recently terminated from the SBA’s 8(a) Program for failing to comply with the subcontracting limits applicable to its 8(a) contracts. The SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals upheld the termination, writing that the SBA had properly terminated the 8(a) contractor for “willfully violating SBA regulations.”  SBA OHA rejected the contractor’s argument that it was exempt from the subcontracting limits under the so-called non-manufacturer rule. SBA… [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 1:48 pm by Steven Koprince
In the 1990s comedy Groundhog Day, Bill Murray played a weatherman who found himself living the same day over and over again.  I am having the same feeling reading SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals cases these days (yes, this is what qualifies as my reading material of choice; don’t judge). As it has at least five other times since December, SBA OHA has shot down the SBA’s rejection of an 8(a) application under the “social disadvantage” factor.  As was the case in… [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 8:03 am by emagraken
In  the course of a lawsuit it is not uncommon for expert witnesses to occasionally be unavailable for trial.  When this happens their evidence is often recorded by way of pre trial deposition.  If the parties don’t consent to this practice the party wishing to rely on the expert can seek a court order permitting a deposition.  Useful reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, Victoria Registry, addressing such an application. In this week’s case (Campbell v.… [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 1:46 pm by Steven Koprince
The SBA failed to properly evaluate the 8(a) Program application of a small business owned by a disabled individual, according to a recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals. SBA OHA’s decision in Striker Electric, SBA No. BDPE-465 (2013) comes on the heels of a December 2012 case in which SBA OHA held that the SBA had improperly evaluated the 8(a) Program application of a woman-owned business.  Together, the two decisions may suggest that SBA OHA is holding the SBA to a… [read post]
17 Sep 2013, 10:27 am by Steven Koprince
When it comes to the regulations governing small government contractors, lateness can lead to tough consequences.  For instance, responding late to a small business size protest might cause the SBA to conclude that the contractor is a large business, and a late proposal submission can get a bid tossed out. Lateness can also lead to severe consequences within the SBA 8(a) program.  In a recent decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that the SBA properly terminated an 8(a)… [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 12:25 pm by Steven Koprince
In a case that ought to make 8(a) participants sit up and take notice, an 8(a) company was terminated from the 8(a) program for failing to obtain the SBA’s prior approval of its teaming agreement for an 8(a) contract–and the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals upheld the termination. SBA OHA’s decision in Appeal of Accent Services Co., Inc., SBA No. BDP-421 (2011) involved an 8(a) program participant, Accent Services Co., Inc.  Accent was admitted to the 8(a) program in… [read post]