Legal Opinion
Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided April 18, 2013No. 07-725CPublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, 25 U.S.C. § 450 (“IS-DEAA”); RCFC 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6); Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 7103; Tolling; Indirect Contract Support Costs; Res Judicata
OPINION AND ORDER
SWEENEY, Judge
Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”). Plaintiff, Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation (“Bristol Bay”) alleges that the government breached a statutory and contractual duty when it entered into contracts with plaintiff for plaintiff to provide…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Prairie County, Montana and Greenlee County, Arizona v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Allen Engineering Contractor, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
- Etchegoinberry v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Ingham Regional Medical Center v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.