Legal Opinion
Sweet v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided January 11, 2005No. Nos. 00-274C, 00-292C, 01-434CPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED OPINION
FIRESTONE, Judge.
In this action, the plaintiffs are seeking attorneys’ fees, expenses, and settlement costs under an indemnification agreement between the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) and the United States that was executed pursuant to the Price-Anderson Act, Pub.L. No. 85-744, 72 Stat. 837 (1958) (current version at 42 U.S.C. § 2210 (2004)). In Sweet v. United States, 53 Fed.Cl. 208 (2002) (“Sweet /”) this court held that under the terms of the Price-Anderson Act and the indemnification agreement between MIT and the United States, the plaintiffs were entitled…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Perrin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Key Tronic Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Noritake Co., Inc. v. M/v Hellenic ChampionCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Lasalle Talman Bank, F.S.B. v. United States, Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Peter Fabrics, Inc. v. S.S. "Hermes"Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Richmond American Homes of Colorado, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Doherty v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
- Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.