Legal Opinion
International Air Response v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided June 1, 2001No. 00-428CPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*510 OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
This case is before the court after briefing on defendant’s motion to dismiss on the ground that plaintiff failed to timely file a complaint. In ruling on defendant’s motion, the court must consider the effect of a federal district court judge’s order staying enforcement of a contracting officer’s decision that would have commenced the running of the applicable statute of limitations. Argument is deemed unnecessary.
FACTS
International Air Response (“plaintiff’) challenges a contracting officer’s decision that plaintiffs 1989 Exchange Agreement (the “Agreement”) with the…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Irwin v. Department of Veterans AffairsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. KrogerSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Bender v. Williamsport Area School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Frymire v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
- International Air Response v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- International Air Response v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- International Air Response v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- International Air Response, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008