Legal Opinion
Cienega Gardens v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided April 29, 1997No. 94-1CPublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAMAGES OPINION
ROBINSON, Judge:
The issue before the court is the precise measure of damages to which plaintiffs are entitled. This Opinion shall be read in conjunction with the court’s March 25, 1995 Opinion on liability, Cienega Gardens v. United States, 33 Fed.Cl. 196 (1995) (“Cienega /”), in which the court held that: (1) plaintiffs have established privity of contract between themselves and the government; (2) the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD” or “the agency”) was authorized to enter into enforceable contracts with plaintiffs; and (3) defendant breached its contracts…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Jones v. Rath Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Cienega Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Cienega Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Franconia Associates v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Resource Investments, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Cienega Gardens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.