Moss v. Adams

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the SSA was not required to write their own separate decision document when they adopted the agency’s analysis in full, as long as the agency’s rationales were sufficiently documented
• finding no indication that the SSA did not exercise independent judgment by relying on reports of others
• finding no indication that the SSA did not exercise independent judgment by relying on reports of others
• “The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has recognized that ‘[procurement officials have substantial discretion to determine which proposal represents the best value for the government.’ ” (quoting E.W. Bliss Co. v. United States, 77 F.3d at 449)
• “The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has recognized that ‘[procurement officials have substantial discretion to determine which proposal represents the best value for the government.’” (quoting E.W. Bliss Co. v. United States, 77 F.3d at 449)
• “The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has recognized that ‘[p]roeurement officials have substantial discretion to determine which proposal represents the best value for the government.’ ” (quoting E.W. Bliss Co. v. United States, 77 F.3d at 449)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).