Legal Opinion

Khairallah v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided February 26, 1999No. 93-132CPublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BRUGGINK, Judge.

Plaintiff in this action, Nagy Khairallah, alleges that he contracted with the United States, acting through the United States Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), to provide services as a confidential informant in exchange for twenty five percent of the value of assets seized as the result of that information. Pending is defendant’s renewed motion for summary judgment.1 The matter was transferred to this judge on December 10, 1998. It is fully briefed and oral argument is deemed unnecessary. For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. MerrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Eastport Steamship Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
  4. United States v. BeebeSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
  5. H. Landau & Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Jumah v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  2. SGS-92-X003 v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  3. Spencer v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  4. Cornejo-Ortega v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
  5. Doe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2000

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API