N.C. Bd. of Exam. for Speech Path. v. N.C. State Bd. of Educ.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that neither corporate parent of dissolved subsidiary that had contract with Government were contractors as defined by CDA, and thus not liable under subsidiary’s contract
• “Although [the Claims Court] does not generally have jurisdiction over implied-in-law contracts, an exception exists for counterclaims for money damages asserted by the government.” (internal citation omitted)
• “Although [the Claims Court] does not generally have jurisdiction over implied-in-law contracts, an exception exists for counterclaims for money damages asserted by the government.” (citing § 1503 and Cherry Cotton Mills ) (internal citation omitted)
• “Although this court does not generally have jurisdiction over implied-in-law contracts, . . ., an exception exits for counterclaims for money damages asserted by the government.” (citing to 28 U.S.C. § 1503 (1982))
• “Although this court does not generally have jurisdiction over implied-in-law contracts, . . ., an exception exits for counterclaims for money damages asserted by the government.” (citing to 28 U.S.C. § 1503 (1982))
• “Although [the Claims Court] does not generally have jurisdiction over implied-in-law contracts, an exception exists for counterclaims for money damages asserted by the government.” (citing § 1503 and Cherry Cotton Mills) (internal citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).