Legal Opinion

BMY-Combat Systems Division of Harsco Corp. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 13, 1998No. 90-252 CPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Senior Judge.

At the request of the parties, the consideration of this case has been divided into three phases. The first phase on liability included a trial, after which the court issued its opinion on liability on May 23, 1997, see BMY—Combat Sys. Div. of Harsco Corp. v. United States, 38 Fed.Cl. 109 (1997) (the liability opinion). The court denied plaintiffs claim for an equitable adjustment, allowed defendant’s counterclaim under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (1994) (FCA), allowed defendant’s breach of contract counterclaim, and denied defendant’s…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. United States v. BornsteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Jack Burton Tunnell v. Doris Wiley and Richard Sprague, First Asst. District AttorneyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1975

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Morse Diesel International, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  2. United States v. Cabrera-DiazDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2000
  3. United States Ex Rel. Roby v. Boeing Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1999
  4. United States Ex Rel. Roby v. Boeing Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1999
  5. John Hendrix v. J-M Manufacturing Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2023

2 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