Legal Opinion
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided February 20, 1992No. 91-1204CPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
HODGES, Judge.
This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We find that plaintiffs’ claims and defendant’s termination for default are properly before this court for the reasons stated below. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is therefore denied in part.
FACTS
In 1984, the Department of the Navy introduced the Advanced Tactical Aircraft Program (A-12) to develop a carrier-based, low observable (Stealth) attack aircraft. The Navy asked four defense contractors to form teams to compete for the A-12 Studies and Full Scale Engineering…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- The United States v. Johnson Controls, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Erickson Air Crane Company of Washington, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Contract Cleaning Maintenance, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Placeway Construction Corporation v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Dawco Construction, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corporation, Plaintiff-Cross and General Dynamics Corporation, Plaintiff-Cross v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- Brooks Range Contract Services, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Fairchild Industries, Incorporated v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997