Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense v. Applied Companies, Inc. (2003)
green
· 106 citation events
across 7 courts.
Showing the 41 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200320142026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
Cir.2004) (giving guidance is appropriate for the "benefit of the parties and the trial court"); Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.Cir.2003) ("The Board's statements regarding quantum suggest that it is appropriate for us to provide guidance regarding the proper measure of Applied's recovery.").
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1334 (Fed.Cir.2003) (" Applied Companies ").
green
California Federal Bank v. United States (2005)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003).
green
England v. Contel Advanced Systems (2004)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1334 (Fed.
“Applied Companies”
green
Federal Group, Inc. v. United States (2005)
Corp. v. United States, 356 F.3d 1372, 1379 (Fed.Cir.2004) (citing Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1336 (Fed.Cir.2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 981 , 124 S.Ct. 462 , 157 L.Ed.2d 370 (2003)).
green
Sheffield Barbers, LLC (2025)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1341 (Fed.
“Where the Government’s estimate is negligently prepared and appellant reasonably relies upon that estimate to its financial detriment, the remedy is an equitable adjustment.” (quoting HKH Cap. Hotel Corp., ASBCA No. 47575 , 98-1 BCA ¶ 29,548 at 146,472)
green
Burnham Associates, Inc. (2017)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.
citing Womackv. United States, 389 F.2d 793, 800 (Ct. Cl. 1968)
green
Engineered Demolition, Inc. v. United States (2006)
While the government is generally provided with a measure of flexibility in determining the estimated quantities in its contracts, it nevertheless is bound by “an implied obligation ... to ‘act in good faith and use reasonable care in computing its estimated needs____ Failure to meet that obligation constitutes a breach of the resulting contract.’ ” Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.Cir.2003) (analyzing the duty of the government in providing estimated…
green
United Medical Supply Co. v. United States (2005)
First, “there is an implied obligation upon the government to ‘act in good faith and use reasonable care in computing its estimated needs.’ ” Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.Cir.2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 981 , 124 S.Ct. 462 , 157 L.Ed.2d 370 (2003) (quoting Medart, Inc., 967 F.2d at 581 ).
green
Dzyne Technologies, LLC v. Spaceflight, Inc. (2025)
VHC, Inc., 179 F.3d 16 at 1364-65 (involving clear termination by the government); Rumsfeld, 325 F.3d at 1333 (same); 17 Coll.
same
green
Bes design/build, LLC v. United States (2025)
Cir. 2004) (“Thus, the ‘equitable adjustment compensates for changes by paying a contractor its increased costs resulting from the change, plus an allowance for profit on that cost.’” (quoting Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1341 (Fed.
green
D2 Government Solutions (2024)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.
citing Womack v. United States, 389 F.2d 793, 800 (Ct. Cl. 1968)
green
MPG West, LLC (2020)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.
citing Womack v. United States, 389 F.2d 793, 800 (Ct. Cl. 1968)
The key characteristic of an enforceable requirements contract is the government’s agreement “to fill all its actual requirements for specified supplies or services during the contract period by purchasing from the awardee, who agrees to provide them at the agreed price.” Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1334 (Fed.
quoting Medart, Inc. v. Austin, 967 F.2d 579, 581 (Fed. Cir. 1992)
green
United Healthcare Partners, Inc. (2016)
The government's estimate of supplies or services to be purchased is of significance for several varieties of government contracts, "as the quantity may impact both a contractor's capacity to supply the contract items and the price at which it agrees to supply them." Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1334-35 (Fed.
Medart, Inc. v. Austin, 967 F.2d 579, 581 (Fed.Cir.1992); Clearwater Forest Indus., Inc. v. United States, 650 F.2d 233, 240 (Ct.Cl.1981); Womack v. United States, 389 F.2d 793, 801 (Ct.Cl.1968). “[T]o the extent that a government estimate is inadequately or negligently prepared, its inclusion without correction in a solicitation or contract constitutes a misrepresentation that, whether deliberate or unintentional, amounts to a breaeh of contract.” Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., …
green
The Ravens Group, Inc. v. United States (2013)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.Cir.2003); Clearwater Forest Indus. v. United States, 650 F.2d 233, 239 (Ct.Cl.1981).
green
CR-RSC Tower I, LLC v. RSC Tower I, LLC (2011)
Assocs., 177 Md.App. 562, 607, 936 A.2d 915 (2007) (citing Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003) and Scott Timber Co. v. United States, 64 Fed.Cl. 130, 137-38 (2005)).
green
Carolina Power & Light Co. v. United States (2008)
“Because the purpose of a damages award is to put the non-breaching party ‘in as good a position as [it] would have been in had the breaching party fully performed,’ the logical starting point for a damages analysis is an understanding of the breaching party’s obligations under the contract.” Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1336 (Fed.Cir.2003) (brackets in original); see also PSEG Nuclear, LLC, 465 F.3d at 1351 (“Any issues related to the types of damages permitted …
green
Minh-Vu Hoang v. Hewitt Avenue Associates, LLC (2007)
Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003), and Scott Timber Co. v. United States, 64 Fed.Cl. 130, 137-38 (2005) (both explaining in the context of lost profits recovery for breach of contract evidence must show that breach was a substantial factor in causing the loss).
green
GASA, Inc. v. United States (2007)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003).
Id. (citing Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003)); Citizens Fed.
green
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. United States (2006)
“Because the purpose of a damages award is to put the non-breaching party ‘in as good a position as [it] would have been in had the breaching party fully performed,’... the logical starting point for a damages analysis is an understanding of the breaching party’s obligations under the contract.” Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1336 (Fed.Cir.2003) (quoting Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. United States, 88 F.3d 1012, 1021 (Fed.Cir.1996)) (alteration in original).
Cal. Fed., 395 F.3d at 1267 (citing Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003)).
green
Scott Timber Co. v. United States (2005)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003).
green
Padilla v. United States (2003)
Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.
Corp. v. United States, 803 F.2d 650, 655 (Fed.Cir.1986) {“Dewey ”); see also Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328 , 1333 n. 3 (Fed.Cir.); cert. denied — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 462 , — L.Ed.2d -, 72 U.S.L.W. 3007 (2003).
green
Nycal Offshore Development Corp. v. United States (2014)
See Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328 , 1336-(Fed.Cir.2003); Glendale Fed.
green
Englewood Terrace Ltd. Partnership v. United States (2012)
As a matter of general contract law, an injured party can collect as expectancy damages, i.e., lost profits, “the loss in value to him of the other party’s performance caused by its failure or deficiency, ... less ... any cost or other loss that he has avoided by not having to perform.” Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 347 (1981); see also Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1344 (Fed.Cir.2003) (Dyk, J., dissenting in part) (quoting Restatement (First) of …
green
Yankee Atomic Electric Co. v. United States (2008)
See, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328 (Fed.Cir.2003) (awarding total breach damages for the Government’s breach of a requirements contract); White v. Delta Constr.
green
Hi-Shear Technology Corporation v. United States (2004)
See id. at 1341-42.
Cir. 1992); see Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328 , 1334–35 (Fed.
reaffirming Medart, Inc.
green
Datalect Computer Services, Inc. v. United States (2003)
See Applied Companies, 325 F.3d at 1330 .
green
Peraton, Inc. (2025)
See, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.
addressing whether the government’s incorrect estimates duped the contractor into unfairly low bid prices
green
Vectrus Systems Corporation (2025)
See, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.
See Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1341 (Fed.
green
Canpro Investments, Ltd v. United States (2017)
See, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1340 (Fed.
declining to apply Torncello because the breach of contract that occurred therein — “diverting business that existed away from the contractor” — was not the type of breach at issue
green
Palafox Street Associates, L.P. v. United States (2015)
Thus, a contractor “may not present a new claim to [the elected forum] that was not first presented to the contracting officer for a final decision.” Modeer v. United States, 68 Fed.Cl. 131, 137 (2005); see Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328 , 1333 n.3 (Fed.Cir.2003) (“[T]he breadth of issues covered in the contracting officer’s decision determines the extent of the contractor’s right of appeal and the [elected forum’s] jurisdiction.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
See *819 Pl.’s Reply at 10 (citing Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., 325 F.3d 1328, 1335 (Fed.Cir.2003); Technical Assistance Int’l., Inc. v. United States, 150 F.3d 1369, 1371-72 (Fed.Cir.1998)).
green
SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States (2012)
See Rumsfeld v. Applied Cos., Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1339 (Fed.Cir.2003) (explaining where the Government breaches a contract and diverts business away from the contractor and does not use the contractor to satisfy a requirements contract, the contractor is entitled to recover lost profits damages); see also Fifth Third Bank v. United States, 518 F.3d 1368, 1374 (Fed.Cir.2008) (“expectancy damages are intended to make a non-breaching party whole” and “expectancy damages includ…
green
AgGrow Oils, L.L.C. v. National Union Fire Insurance (2003)
See Rumsfeld v. Applied Companies, Inc., 325 F.3d 1328, 1344 (Fed.Cir.2003) (“The leading authorities on contracts agree that the normal measure of damages includes lost profits.”) Thus, lost profits are properly recovered if they are “reasonable and not speculative.” Leingang v. City of Mandan Weed Bd., 468 N.W.2d 397, 398 (N.D.1991).