The Boeing Company v. The United States

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that costs of “benefit [to] all business of a contractor rather than a specific existing contract ... as indirect overhead is logical”
• recognizing that allocating similar costs as direct or indirect depends on whether they were incurred pursuant to a “specific requirement in an existing contract” complies with CAS 402
• determining that B & P costs required to complete an existing contract, but not “specifically required,” could be treated as indirect costs
• interpreting contract to determine whether B & P costs related to a Phase II contract proposal specifically were required by or merely generated by a Phase I contact including a Phase II proposal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).