Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that quasi-contracts are implied-in-law contracts and that the Tucker Act does not waive sovereign immunity over implied-in-law contracts
• explaining that a waiver of sovereign immunity must be “unequivocally expressed in statutory text and will be strictly construed, in terms of its scope, in favor of the sovereign”
• relying on Admiralty and the Senate Report at pages 16 and 17 to support the assertion that “[t]his legis- lative history suggests that claims by third parties who are not in privity of contract with the government are not cov- ered by the CDA”
• “[T]he mere provision of goods or services to the government in excess of a party’s legal obligation does not create an implied-in-fact eontract[.]” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Equitable subrogation can be used to recover improper payments to a principal obligor only if made after the obligee received notice of the principal obligor’s default . . . .”
• “[A] surety does become a ‘contractor’ within the meaning of the CDA when it enters into a takeover agreement, and the CDA applies to any post-takeover claims arising out of that agreement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).