Wackenhut Applied Technologies Center, Inc. v. Sygnetron Protection Systems, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge:
In this appeal, we review a judgment of the district court concerning contracts to supply a building security system in a United States government facility, located in Reston, Virginia. Wackenhut Applied Technologies Center, Inc. (WATC) brought this action against Sygnetron Protection Systems, Inc. (Sygnetron) and The De La Rue Company, P.L.C. (De La Rue), alleging breach of contract and a number of tor-tious interferences with its business relationships. WATC, the prevailing plaintiff, appeals the court’s reduction of its award, and Sygnetron and De La…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Russello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. TurketteSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- Tidewater Beverage Services, Inc. v. Coca Cola Co.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1995
- United States v. SheltonDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1993
- Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- Wackenhut Applied Technologies Center, Incorporated v. Sygnetron Protection Systems, Incorporated the De La Rue Company, Plc, Commonwealth of Virginia, Intervenor. Wackenhut Applied Technologies Center, Incorporated v. The De La Rue Company, Plc, Commonwealth of Virginia, Intervenor, and Sygnetron Protection Systems, Incorporated, Wackenhut Applied Technologies Center, Incorporated v. Sygnetron Protection Systems, Incorporated, Commonwealth of Virginia, Intervenor, and the De La Rue Company, PlcCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1992