Raymond v. Hemple

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that FAR provisions do not require that discussions be held before a best value award can occur
• stating that the decision to supplement the administrative record rests within the sound discretion of the trial court
• noting that Day & Zimmermann Services v. United States, 38 Fed. Cl. 591, 604 (1997), was an unusual case where other flaws in the procurement rendered the contracting officer’s decision not to engage in discussions an improper one
• reviewing the record of a proposal’s evaluation by the government, rather than focusing on conflicting evidence of the information communicated in a debriefing
• characterizing the error in Day & Zimmerman as “the agency’s use of an undisclosed” and possibly inaccurate benchmark
• reviewing the record of a proposal’s evaluation by the government, rather than focusing on conflicting evidence of the information communicated in a debriefing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).