Legal Opinion

Barko v. Halliburton Company

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided December 6, 2018No. Civil Action No. 2005-1276Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF'COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ex rel. HARRY BARKO ) ) Plaintiff-Relator, ) ) v. ) Civil Case No. 05-1276 ) HALLI_BURTON COMPANY e_t al., ) ) Defendants`. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION After more than a` decade of litigation, twelve opinions by three different district judges, and two writs of mandamus from the Court of Appeals, this Court grant`ed summary judgment for defendants in this qui tam suit, rejecting Barko’s claim that government contractor KBR (a Halliburton subsidiary) engaged in improper procurement practices. A few weeks later,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State of Illinois v. Sangamo Construction Co. And J. L. Simmons Company, Inc., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
  2. Mother and Father v. James CassidyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
  3. Richard W. Barber, Personal Representative of the Estate of Barbara W. Reese, Deceased v. John J. Ruth and Lucille A. RuthCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
  4. Baez v. United States Department of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
  5. Cbt Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API