E. J. Burns Co. v. Burlong

How courts have described this case

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

• dismissing purported takings claim because it represented “nothing more than a garden variety contract dispute”
• denying takings remedy because plaintiff “remained unfettered in its ability to use the legal process defined in the contract” to remedy claim against Government
• granting defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s takings claim and noting that, “at all times, the [government] purported to act pursuant to and consistent with the terms of the contract and never suggested that it was not bound by each term in the contract”
• no taking where government acted in a proprietary capacity and exercised rights under contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).