Expressway Construction, Inc. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THOMAS F. HOGAN, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is the issue of the scope of review which governs the Court in considering this contract dispute. Plaintiff claims that this Court should hear this case on de novo review. Defendant counters that the Court’s scope of review is limited to the administrative record. The Court ordered the parties to submit briefs on the issue of the scope of review. In consideration of the briefs, oral argument of counsel at the hearing held on the matter, and the entire record of the case, and in accordance with the bench…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Carlo Bianchi & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
- General Railway Signal Company v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- General Railway Signal Co. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1979
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kiska Construction Corp.-U.S.A. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Expressway Const. v. WASH. METRO. A. TRANSIT AUTH.District Court, District of Columbia · 1987
- Kiska Construction corporation-u.S.A. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010