Greenland v. Mitchell

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that compliance with the FAR’s provisions constitutes a meaningful discussion
• explaining that compliance with FAR’s provisions constitutes a meaningful discussion
• “Although the duty to raise mistakes in an offeror’s proposal is no longer set forth explicitly in the regulations governing negotiated procurements, that duty undoubtedly still exists.”
• “This federal statute provides that, in negotiated procurements, agencies ‘shall evaluate ... competitive proposals and make an award based solely on the factors specified in the solicitation.’” (quoting 10 U.S.C. § 2305(b)(1))
• “This federal statute provides that, in negotiated procurements, agencies ‘shall evaluate ... competitive proposals and make an award based solely on the factors specified in the solicitation.’” (quoting 10 U.S.C. § 2305(b)(1))
• “It is critical to note that ‘a protestor’s burden is particularly great in negotiated procurements because the contracting officer is entrusted with a relatively high degree of discretion, and greater still, where, as here, the procurement is a “best-value” procurement.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).