Legal Opinion
United Pacific Insurance Company, Reliance Insurance Company, and Reliance National v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided September 20, 2006No. 20-1802PublishedCited by 177 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHALL, Circuit Judge.
United Pacific Insurance Company, Reliance Insurance Company, and Reliance National (collectively, “United Pacific”) brought suit against the government in the United States Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1). In its suit, United Pacific, which had acted as a Miller Act surety in connection with a government construction project, sought to recover in quantum me-ruit the amount over and above the original contract price that it was required to pay in order to complete the project after the contractor defaulted. United Pacific alleged that…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Gould, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Boise Cascade Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- John C. Boyle, Paintiff-Appellant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Denis E. Dehne v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by177 opinions
- Jeremiah Harris v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- International Data Products Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Woodson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Martinez v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
172 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.