Legal Opinion
Centex Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided February 24, 2003No. 96-494CPublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BRUGGINK, Judge.
Pending in this Winstar1 related contract action are plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on damages and the government’s cross-motion for summary judgment. Oral argument was held on November 8, 2002. Additionally, on December 19, 2002, the court *383took testimony from two witnesses pursuant to RCFC 42(b) on the issue of plaintiffs’ covered asset losses (“CALs”).2 For the reasons set out below, the defendant’s motion is granted in part and denied in part and the plaintiffs’ motion is granted in part and denied in part. After tidal regarding the plaintiffs’ CALs, the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States v. Winstar Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Hanover Bank v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Bluebonnet Savings Bank, F.S.B., Stone Capital, Inc. (Formerly Known as Cfsb Corporation), and James M. Fail v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Lasalle Talman Bank, F.S.B. v. United States, Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Southern Nuclear Operating Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Home Savings of America, F.S.B. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Anchor Savings Bank, FSB v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Citizens Federal Bank, FSB v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- System Fuels, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.