Legal Opinion
Lublin Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided September 19, 2012No. 07-206CPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ALLEGRA, Judge:
“Even the clearest and most perfect circumstantial evidence ... ought to be received with great caution.” 1
Lublin Corporation, t/a Century 21 Advantage Gold (Lublin or plaintiff), a real estate broker, was a subcontractor on a contract that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had with another company. Lublin alleges that, in the course of a programmatic review of that prime contract, HUD officials agreed to keep Lublin’s answers to various questions confidential. Lublin claims that, despite these assurances, HUD officials leaked its responses to the…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Trauma Service Group v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Alfred L. Stone v. City of Indianapolis Public Utilities DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
- San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
- Precision Pine & Timber, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Centex Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fairholme Funds, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016