Who Knew? Limitations Defense Kept in Play Against U.S.
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.23.12
In Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. U.S., the Court of Federal Claims found there to be triable issues of fact with regard to the contractor's statute of limitations defense as to when the government's claim accrued, i.e., when the government "knew or should have known" of alleged CAS 418 noncompliance. This case follows a series of similar recent cases at the CFC and the ASBCA and raises the issue of who in the government needs to have notice of a claim for it to accrue -- a contracting officer or "other responsible actors" such as DCAA auditors -- a question the court declined to resolve "[a]t this early juncture" in the proceedings.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 01.14.26
PFAS Reporting Gets Real in 2026
State regulation of PFAS-containing products will ramp up significantly in 2026. Most notably, companies will have to comply with Minnesota’s sweeping new product-reporting requirements. As we explain below, Minnesota’s requirements cast a wide net, capturing companies that may not sell products directly into the state. This and other features of the state’s reporting program are likely to present significant compliance challenges for a wide range of businesses.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.13.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 01.13.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 01.13.26
