State v. Y. B. (In re Y. B.)

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that generally a contractor should “challenge an allegedly unfair and inaccurate performance evaluation as a contract-performance claim pursuant to the CDA at the time the [agency] issued the performance evaluation”
• noting the contractor’s contention that it “‘demanded in writing that the CPAR be corrected’ ”
• finding there to be no Contract Disputes Act claim where the plaintiff failed to show any legal grounds entitling it to the relief sought
• written comments to initial performance evaluation which claimed entitlement to the relief of a corrected CPAR satisfied plaintiff’s obligation to file claim with the CO for purposes of the CDA
• “So long as [the contractor] grounds its entitlement on some legal basis, [it] has met the ‘matter of right’ requirement for filing a [Contract Disputes Act] claim.” (emphasis added)
• “Plaintiff is only required to assert entitlement that has some legal basis.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).