Kutz v. Lee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Government’s position was not substantially justified even though it was supported by a multitude of GAO decisions, because those GAO decisions were contrary to explicit regulations
• holding the government’s actions were not substantially justified despite numerous decisions by GAO supporting the government’s position, because GAO’s prior decisions were contrary to explicit regulations
• holding the government’s actions were not substantially justified despite numerous decisions by GAO supporting the government’s position, where GAO’s prior decisions were contrary to explicit regulations
• allowing for recovery of costs associated with travel to attend a pre-solicitation conference, FedEx deliveries, printing, and obtaining a legal opinion
• applying a mid-point adjustment factor for fees in a bid-protest case of short duration
• awarding attorneys’ fees under EAJA and bid preparation costs under the Tucker Act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).