Legal Opinion
City of Burbank, California v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided July 31, 2000No. 99-164CPublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FUTEY, Judge.
This contract case is before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), an agency of the United States government (defendant), entered into a contract for the sale of electric power (Contract) with the City of Burbank, a municipal corporation, created under the laws and existing as a political subdivision of the State of California (plaintiff). Plaintiff claims that defendant breached the Contract when defendant failed to adhere to the Contract’s provisions concerning (1) conversion and…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Data Disc, Incorporated v. Systems Technology Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- John G. Rocovich, Jr. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Louise J. Hamlet v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Vanalco, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2000
- City of Burbank, California v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2000
- Inter-Coastal Xpress, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2001
- Trafalgar House Construction, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.