Using Available Funds For Other Purposes No Excuse For Breach
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.22.05
The Supreme Court in Cherokee Nation of Okla. v. Leavitt (Mar. 1, 2005) sustained breach actions by several Indian tribes against the Department of Interior, which had tried to avoid its contractual obligations by saying that it didn't have enough appropriated funds to meet all of its various responsibilities. In so doing, the Court reaffirmed the long-established rule for procurement contracts that, if Congress has not earmarked funds specifically for a program and "if the amount of an unrestricted appropriation is sufficient to fund the contract, the contractor is entitled to payment even if the agency has allocated the funds to another purpose or assumes other obligations that exhaust the funds," even if the contract has language such as "subject to the availability of funds."
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.01.26
On March 25, 2026, in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a $1 billion verdict against Cox. The judgment was the result of a jury trial in which Sony claimed that Cox was liable for contributory copyright infringement because it knew that its customers were using its service to infringe yet did not respond with sufficient diligence to prevent that infringement.
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.01.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 04.01.26
Client Alert | 5 min read | 03.31.26
Washington State Bans and Voids Most Noncompetes, Narrows Nonsolicits
