Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The legal issue in question revolved around the terms of the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) which demands that pricing be based upon fair market value. The government stated that TINA applies to all contact negotiations regarding all essential medical services. Additionally, under the Christian precedent, contract clauses that express a "significant or deeply ingrained strand of public procurement policy" are automatically understood to be in all government contacts, even if the clause is not overtly stated.
Holding of the Court
The Court found in favor of the VA, and against UCSF.
Court's Rationale or Reasoning for its Decision
UCSF had a long-standing history of negotiating with...
Even though the 1990 contract in question did not contain a specific defective pricing clause, previous contracts had included such a clause. Moreover, the stated intent of TINA, which was intended to avoid excessive waste of taxpayer dollars, was already a "deeply ingrained" principle of procurement policy. Obligatory Congressional enactments govern federal contracts and there was a clause within the contract noting that procurement regulations issued under statutory authority would affect the terms of the contract. Given case law (including the Christian precedent) combined with the UCSF's history as a seasoned government contractor, both law and circumstance weighed against the hospital and in favor of the Veteran's Administration.
The Court found in favor of the VA, and against UCSF.
Court's Rationale or Reasoning for its Decision
UCSF had a long-standing history of negotiating with the VA. Even though the 1990 contract in question did not contain a specific defective pricing clause, previous contracts had included such a clause. Moreover, the stated intent of TINA, which was intended to avoid excessive waste of taxpayer dollars, was already a "deeply ingrained" principle of procurement policy. Obligatory Congressional enactments govern federal contracts and there was a clause within the contract noting that procurement regulations issued under statutory authority would affect the terms of the contract. Given case law (including the Christian precedent) combined with the UCSF's history as a seasoned government contractor, both law and circumstance weighed against the hospital and in favor of the Veteran's Administration.
D. joined the Majority. Justices Blackmun, H.A. And Powell, L.F. wrote a special and regular concurrence respectively. In addition to voting with the majority, O'Connor S.D. joined Powel's concurrence. Writing Dissenting Opinion(s): Stevens, J.P. filed a dissenting opinion in which Marshall, T. And Brennan, W.J joined. Brennan also filed a separate dissenting opinion in which Marshall T. joined. Case 5 Citation: Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe (2000) Argued: March 29, 2000 Date
ATLANTA MOTEL v. UNITED STATES, 379 U.S. 241 (1964) 379 U.S. 241 In the Court of: U.S. Supreme Court Argued on: October 5, 1964 Decided on: December 14, 1964. Facts Reasons for the Lawsuit: The appellant is the owner of a large motel (Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc.) in Atlanta, Georgia who restricts his clientele to white people, 75% of whom are inter-state travelers. He has filed a suit to perpetuate his policy of refusing rooms to
Indianapolis vs. Edmond 531 U.S. 32, 121S. ct.447, 148 L. Ed. 2D 333(2000) Facts: In an attempt to discover and intercept unlawful narcotics on transit across the city, Indianapolis police implemented a highway checkpoint program, where motorists would be stopped at designated checkpoints, and their vehicles searched for narcotics. The checks lasted no more than five minutes and involved both an open-view examination, and a sniffer dog program. Two motorists, one of
Case Brief: In this particular case, Mrs. Gregory, who is in this context the taxpayer, was keen on avoiding double taxation. As the owner of the stocks of United Mortgage Corp., an entity that held some stocks at Monitor Securities Corp, she desired to sell Monitor Securities Corp's securities for a significant profit. However, there was a problem. If done as it should have been done, taxation would occur at two
Com" from an Internet host in Maryland to a host in New York. The New York host turned out to be merely an intermediary of a Canada-based company (Tucows). Tucows eventually turned over the domain name to the Alabama authorities upon their request. Thereafter, Novak appealed the decision in the Alabama case successfully and then filed an action against Tucows for illegally depriving him of his property by conversion. Tucows' defense
hotel sent the security guard on duty to check on Gonzalez in his hotel room. The defendant rebuffed to open the door. The security guard heard the sound of breaking glasses and the high television volume. This prompted the hotel to summon Laredo Police Department to assist in carrying out investigations. The hotel staff did not appeal the police to take Gonzalez into custody. In the other case, Michael