Search for: "Boeing Co. v. State"
Results 1 - 20
of 135
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2025, 4:49 am
Co. v. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 8:30 am
" Jerome Grubart, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Feb 2025, 10:56 am
Co-blogger, Paul Cassell represented the family members of victims of Boeing crash, who objected to the deal. [read post]
30 Aug 2024, 5:06 pm
”The False Claims Act imposes treble damages and penalties on those who knowingly and falsely claim money from the United States or knowingly fail to pay money owed to the United States. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 7:45 pm
And tomorrow, Thursday, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 8:31 am
Co., 916 F.2d 548, 550 (9th Cir. 1990). [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 7:17 pm
Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc., 770 F.2d 399, 407 (4th Cir. 1985) and United States v. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 9:25 am
”[12] Importantly, there is no presumption of cost reasonableness.[13] If an initial review of the facts results in the Government challenging a specific cost, the contractor has the burden to prove that the cost is reasonable.[14] The FAR provides that whether a cost is reasonable depends on a “variety of considerations and circumstances,” including the following: Whether it is the type of cost generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the conduct of the… [read post]
9 Aug 2023, 10:26 am
That may be because with this decision and earlier decisions in Marchand and In re Boeing Co. [read post]
2 Jul 2023, 8:52 am
In Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 11:17 am
Boeing Co. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm
Boeing Co. v. [read post]
24 May 2023, 3:55 pm
Welcome back to the Cost Corner, where we provide practical insight into the complex cost and pricing regulations that apply to Government contractors. [read post]
22 Apr 2023, 5:11 am
Boeing Co., Case No. 19 C 3365 (N.D. [read post]
22 Apr 2023, 5:11 am
Boeing Co., Case No. 19 C 3365 (N.D. [read post]
25 Mar 2023, 5:09 pm
Boeing Co., 392 Ill. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 4:15 pm
See United States v. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 9:01 pm
The court stated that it did not need to decide whether liability existed under the prong 1 claim to dispose of the motion to dismiss, but noted that a report prepared by external counsel indicated that the company had a “woefully inadequate compliance system. [read post]
25 Jan 2023, 2:44 pm
Caremark started out as a logical consequence of Smith v. [read post]
