Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
*728MEMORANDUM OPINION ON RECONSIDERATION AND FINAL JUDGMENT REGARDING DAMAGES
BRADEN, Judge.
I. The Court’s Resolution On Reconsideration.
Plaintiff (“SMUD”) has requested reconsideration of the court’s prior ruling that it was not foreseeable, on June 14, 1983, when the Standard Contract was executed, that any breach thereof would require the Defendant (“Government”) to be responsible for the costs of SMUD’s decision to utilize a “dual-purpose” dry storage system. See PI. PH Br. at 8-10; see also Sacramento Mun. Util. Dist. v. United States, 70 Fed.Cl. 332, 360-62 and n. 27, 373-74 (2006).1
On…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Yuba Natural Resources, Inc. v. The United States, Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Sun Oil Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1978
- Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. v. United States, Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Dominion Resources, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Energy Northwest v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.