M. Steinthal & Co., Inc. v. Robert J. Seamans, Jr., Secretary of the Air Force, Pioneer Parachute Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a disappointed bidder may not have an adequate remedy at law for recovery of anticipated profits
• restricting the court’s analysis to “whether the … agency’s decision had a reasonable basis” when an unchosen bidder for a government contract sought an injunction
• restricting the court's analysis to \whether the ... agency's decision had a reasonable basis\ when an unchosen bidder for a government contract sought an injunction
• acknowledging the availability of a damages remedy in the Court of Claims that “will compensate the frustrated bidder’s realized financial losses (i.e., the bid preparation costs) resulting from the illegal agency action”
• “court must refrain from judicial intervention into the procurement process unless the actions of the executive officials are without rational basis”
• exigent needs of government may preclude equitable relief, even where impropriety of agency action is apparent and ultimate compensation may be unobtainable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).