Legal Opinion
Lion Raisins, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided August 20, 2003No. Nos. 01-322C, 01-536 CPublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
After obtaining a decision that its suspension from bidding on government contracts was arbitrary and capricious, a supplier to the Government moved for attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (2002) (the “EAJA”). Defendant responds that the supplier has failed to satisfy the statutory criteria mandatory for an award under the EAJA. Argument is deemed unnecessary.
FACTS
The details of the litigation giving rise to plaintiff’s EAJA application are chronicled in Lion Raisins, Inc. v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 238 (2001) (“Lion…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Commissioner, Immigration & Naturalization Service v. JeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Keene Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Ramcor Services Group, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Dalles Irrigation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- Al Ghanim Combined Group Co. Gen. Trad. & Cont. W.L.L. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Geo-Seis Helicopters, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Information Sciences Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Asphalt Supply & Service, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.