Cases

Case: 23-1907 Document: 34 Page: 1 Filed: 10/18/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ SAGE ACQUISITIONS LLC, Appellant v. SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, Appellee ______________________ 2023-1907 ______________________ Appea

Post-.award bid protest; motion for relief from judgment; RCFC 60(b); post-deci-sional change in circumstances; standing; application of Tinton Falls OPINION AND ORDER LETTOW, Judge. The court issued its decision on the administrative record in this post-award bid protest on April 20, 2016. See Q Integrate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ERICA N. HAWTHORNE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 20-393 (RDM) v. RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Erica Hawthorne, the record owner and borrower for a property in the District of

Post-Award Bid Protest; Motion to Dismiss; Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Standing; Substantial Chance. ' OPINION BRUGGINK, Judge This is a post-award bid protest. Plaintiff, REO Solution, LLC (“REO”) alleges that the award of a contract by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) under Solicita

Trial court’s jurisdiction over a case after an appeal has heen filed OPINION AND ORDER LETTOW, Judge. Pending before the court are plaintiffs application for bid preparation and proposal costs (“bid costs”), ECP No. 82, and plaintiffs motion for attorneys’ fees and related nontaxable expenses (“attorneys’ fees”), EOF No. 90, the lat

OPINION AND ORDER 1 LETTOW, Judge. Pending before the court in this post-award bid protest are an application by plaintiff, Q Integrated Companies, LLC (“Q Integrated”), for an award of bid preparation and proposal costs (“bid costs”) pursuant to RCFC 54(d)(1), the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(2),

Post-award bid protest; HUD asset-management contracts for three geographic areas; awards based upon a trade-off between past performance ratings and price; challenge to past performance ratings; adequacy and fairness of discussions with offerors within the competitive range; FAR § 15.306(d) OPINION AND ORDER 1

327 S.W.3d 310 (2010) BANS PROPERTIES, L.L.C., Appellant, v. The HOUSING AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF ODESSA and Odessa Redevelopment Partnership, Ltd., Appellees. No. 11-09-00290-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Eastland. September 30, 2010. *311 C.H. (Hal) Brockett, Jr., Ryan J. McNeel, Jason B. Hamm, Justin W. Nichols, Brockett &

Opinion filed September 30, 2010 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-09-00290-CV __________ BANS PROPERTIES, L.L.C., Appellant V. THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ODESSA AND ODESSA REDEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP, LTD., Appellees

OPINION CHRISTINE O.C. MILLER, Judge. This pre-award bid protest is before the court after argument on the complaint by one of a select number of contractors that regularly bid for the same contract to enjoin performance of a Reverse Auction Program (“RAP”) procurement administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). Plaintiff seeks to preclude HUD from imp

ORDER TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, SR., District Judge. This case is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons below, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion [60] and DENIES Plaintiffs motion [51]. I. Background A. Factual Summary Jeffrey Grant wanted to purchase and develop 2.6 million dollars’ worth of re

Opinion filed September 30, 2010 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 16-261C (E-Filed: December 13, 2017) 1 _____________________________________ PRECISION ASSET MANAGEMENT ) CORP., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Bid Protest; v. ) Me

Atlantic Heights Specialty Script Corp., Plaintiff, againstDownstate at Lich Holding Company, Inc., Atlantic Heights Pharmacy, Inc., Long Island College Hospital, Continuum Health Partners, Inc. a/k/a Continuum Services and Fortis Property Group, LLC, Defendants. 507208/2015

731 F.Supp.2d 488 (2010) MORRIS-GRIFFIN CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. C & L SERVICE CORPORATION, Defendant. Civ. No. 2:10cv298. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. August 16, 2010. *489 Cathy Ann Hinger, Paul Arthur Kaplan, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice PLLC, Washington, DC, Conrad Moss Shumadine

ACCEPTED 03-15-00416-CV 7412400 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION KEVIN R. HUENNEKENS, Bankruptcy Judge. The debtors, Circuit City Stores, Inc., et al, (the “Debtors,” or “Circuit City”) filed these bankruptcy cases under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on November 10, 2008 (the “Petition Date”).1 The Debtors’ bankruptcy cases were consolidated for joint administration pursuant to Rule 1015(b) of the Fed

Supplemental Opinion Regarding Plan Conñrmation, Approving Settlements, and Approving Exit Financing STEVEN W. RHODES, Bankruptcy Judge. Table of Contents I. Introduction.159 II. The Plan CONFIRMATION Prooess. i — 1 ZD i — I A. The City’s Plans of Adjustment. i — 1 <