Bowsher v. Merck & Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice White
I join Part V of the Court’s opinion, and I concur in the remainder to the extent it upholds the GAO’s right to inspect Merck’s “direct” cost records.1 I dissent to the extent the Court refuses to allow the GAO access to any of Merck’s “indirect” cost records.
The statutory provisions at issue, 10 U. S. C. § 2313(b) and 41 U. S. C. § 254(c), clearly were intended to allow the GAO the right to a reasonable degree of access to contractors’ records needed to determine whether prices charged to the Government were excessive. Of course, this right was not intended to be unlimited; the Court…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Touche Ross & Co. v. RedingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- See v. City of SeattleSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. Morton Salt Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Oklahoma Press Publishing Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Schwegmann Bros. v. Calvert Distillers Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.