1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |"Should Have Known" Standard Applied to CDA Statute of Limitations

"Should Have Known" Standard Applied to CDA Statute of Limitations

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.28.13

In what seems likely to be a major landmark in the evolving interpretation of the CDA statute of limitations, the ASBCA has held that the statute began to run in 1999, when a DCMA price analyst had all the information the government needed to recognize that it had a claim for an alleged CAS violation, even though the responsible CO may not have been aware of the claim until an audit report was issued in 2006. The ASBCA held that, in the absence of any evidence of trickery or concealment, the government "should have known" that it had a claim based on the contractor's 1999 cost proposal that appeared to be inconsistent with its disclosed accounting practice and that the government could not unilaterally extend the statute of limitations by failing to perform an audit that put the CO on actual notice that there might be a claim.


Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.02.26

OCC and FDIC Redefine “Unsafe or Unsound Practices”: The New Supervisory Framework for Banks

On August 27, 2026, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) jointly issued a final rule that, for the first time, gives the term “unsafe or unsound practice” a binding regulatory definition.[1] With it came a uniform standard for Matters Requiring Attention (MRAs) and revised OCC examination manuals.[2]The Federal Reserve did not join the rulemaking, but has adopted comparable standards through guidance. What that means for holding companies and state-chartered institutions is addressed below.[3] The regulation takes effect November 2, 2026, and the revised OCC examination manuals took effect upon their issuance on August 27....

View All Insights