Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ALLEGRA, Judge.
“If a contract is broken, the measure of damages generally is the same, whatever the cause of the breach. ”1
This is the second leg of a jurisprudential voyage having its genesis in a series of contracts entered into between the plaintiff, Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority (CMHA or plaintiff), and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to provide low-income housing under the United States Housing Act of 1937 (the Housing Act). This court previously held that plaintiffs rights under these contracts were repu*537diated by Congress in 1994, when it amended…
2Cases cited125 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
120 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- North Star Alaska Housing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- One & Ken Valley Housing Group v. Maine State Housing AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2013
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Klamath Irrigation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Yankee Atomic Electric Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.