39 C.F.R. § 601.102
Revocation of prior purchasing regulations
All previous postal purchasing regulations, including the Postal Contracting Manual, Procurement Manual, the Purchasing Manual (Issues 1, 2 and 3), and procurement handbooks, circulars, and instructions, are revoked and are superseded by the regulations contained in this part.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1979–1998 · leading case: Modern Sys. Tech. Corp. v. The United States, 979 F.2d 200 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Modern Sys. Tech. Corp. v. The United States, 979 F.2d 200 (Fed. Cir. 1992). “According to the Procurement Manual and its companion publication, the Procurement Handbook, a basic pricing agreement is similar to an ordering- agreement, the difference being that “ordering agreements are used for large dollar amounts and basic pricing agreements are used for…”
DeMatteo Constr. Co. v. United States, 220 Ct. Cl. 579 (Ct. Cl. 1979). “) The Postal Contracting Manual is incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations ( 39 C.”
Florida, Dep't of Ins. v. United States, 33 Fed. Cl. 188 (Fed. Cl. 1995). “39 C.F.R. § 601.102 . It is issued pursuant to statutory authority, and therefore has the force and effect of law.”
Modern Sys. Tech. Corp. v. United States, 24 Cl. Ct. 360 (Ct. Cl. 1991). “According to the Procurement Manual and its companion publication, the Procurement Handbook, a basic pricing agreement is similar to an ordering agreement, the difference being that “ordering agreements are used for large dollar amounts and basic pricing agreements are used for…”
At & T Corp. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 57 F. Supp. 2d 522 (N.D. Ill. 1998). “Postal Contracting Manual [superseded by the Procurement Manual, see 39 C.F.R. § 601.102 ] ... [and] (3) ... Management Instructions .”
James v. United States Postal Serv., 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7692 (D.V.I. 1979). “That section provides that the agency decision: “[S]hall be final and conclusive unless the same is fradulent [sic] or capricious or arbitrary or so grossly erroneous as necessarily to imply bad faith, or is not supported by substantial evidence”. Plaintiff has not herein met…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.