Browning v. City of Huntsville

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that recovery against the Government would be permissible to the extent plaintiff could establish that it is owed money under a provision independent of the offending indemnification clause
• dismissing indemnity claim, but permitting plaintiff to show damages for breach of contract if it could prove its loss was a “direct and foreseeable consequence of [the government’s] breach of some other contractual duty”
• court could not state as a matter of law what obligations are “necessary expenses” of “property management”
• “plaintiff does not invoke an exception to the Anti-Deficiency Act, so [] the contracting officer in this case did not lawfully bind the United States to an open-ended indemnification”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).