Stone v. Kaufman & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the prejudice determination for purposes of standing “assumes all non-frivolous allegations to be true”
• stating that, in making its prejudice determination on the merits, the court will only consider “those allegations which have been proven true”
• stating that the “reviewing court is not permitted to substitute its own judgment for that of the agency, even if it would have come to a different decision than the agency”
• upholding a sole source award requested by Egypt in its LOA under the international agreement exception in 10 U.S.C. § 2304(c)(4)
• questioning whether organizational conflicts of interest rules apply when a foreign government makes the challenged decision
• “Generally, there are three types of OCIs—resulting from unequal access to information, biased ground rules, and impaired objectivity.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).