Urban Data Systems, Inc. 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.

• stating that the Board opinion \determined that both subcontracts were void ab initio” and later \affirming] the opinion of the [Board]”
• describing such provisions as “defect[ive]” and non-payable, and observing that the government “had no power to enter into the challenged price terms”
• affirming \the Board’s decision that the subcontracts had invalid price terms” and stating that it was \plain that only the price terms of the two subcontracts were invalid' — not any other part of those agreements”
• “[T]he United States will not be estopped to deny the acts of its agents who have acted beyond the scope of their actual authority.”
• “No showing of unfair or inefficient increase in price or costs is necessary in order to render such a contract illegal. The theoretical contravention of the prohibition is adequate to make the arrangement illegal.”
• remanding for determination of “the value to the Government”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).