Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
Collateral Estoppel;
Law of the Case Doctrine;
Mandate Doctrine;
Mitigation Costs;
Nuclear Waste Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 10101-10270 (2006);
10 C.F.R. Part 171 (NRC fees);
10 C.F.R. § 961.11, Art. VI B; V D (exchange rights);
Fed. R. Evid. 702 (expert opinions);
RCFC 26(a)(l)(A)(iii) (disclosure of damages);
Restatement (second) of contracts (1981);
Restatement (second) of judgments (1982).
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL ORDER
BRADEN, Judge.
This Memorandum Opinion and Final Order adjudicates claims alleged in a Septem*664ber 4, 2009 Complaint, filed by Sacramento Municipal Utility District (“SMUD”), for…
2Cases cited63 opinions
- Library of Congress v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- Indiana Michigan Power Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Bluebonnet Savings Bank, F.S.B., Stone Capital, Inc. (Formerly Known as Cfsb Corporation), and James M. Fail v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Mid-America Tablewares, Inc. v. Mogi Trading Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2018
- System Fuels, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Englewood Terrace Ltd. Partnership v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017