Planning Research Corporation v. The United States, and Electronic Data Systems Federal Corporation, Intervenor

How courts have described this case

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

• vacating a Board of Contract Appeals holding that “went beyond its . . . jurisdiction”
• upholding a finding of a material misstatement and decision to terminate the contract award
• “[T]he misrepresentations of [the contractor], together with the ‘massive’ personnel substitutions made by [the contractor] after award with the acquiescence and assistance of [the agency], tainted the bidding and evaluation process.”
• “[T]he misrepresentations of [the contractor], together with the ‘massive’ personnel substitutions made by [the contractor] after award with the acquiescence and assistance of [the agency], tainted the bidding and evaluation process.”
• “This court has held that intent frequently must be proved by circumstantial evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).