Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Associated Home Builders v. Walnut Creek (1)
- Aunt Hack Ridge Estates v. Planning Commission (1)
- Ayres v. City Council (1)
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Blount Brothers Construction Co. v. United States (1)
-
- Bridge (1)
- C. W. Blakeslee & Sons v. United States (1)
- Chris Nelsen & Son v. City of Monroe (1)
- Christie v. United States (1)
- City of Richmond v. I. J. Smith & Co. (1)
- Contractor (1)
- E. H. Morrill Co. v. State (1)
- E.C. Ernst (1)
- Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. (1)
- FAR (1)
- Farquhar (1)
- Farwell Co. v. United States (1)
- Federal Acquisition Regulation (1)
- Haggart Construction Co. v. State (1)
- Hollerbach v. United States (1)
- J.B. Williams Co. v. United States (1)
- Jack Stone Co. v. United States (1)
- Jordanv. Menomonee Falls (1)
- Klopping v. City of Whittier (1)
- Littman v. Gimello (1)
- National Realty Corp.v. Virginia Beach (1)
- Non-compete (1)
- Parking (1)
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon (1)
- People v. Peninsula Enterprises (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Leasing Sovereignty: On State Infrastructure Contracts, Matthew Titolo
Leasing Sovereignty: On State Infrastructure Contracts, Matthew Titolo
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Avoiding Takings "Accidents": A Tort Perspective On Takings Law, Eric Kades
Avoiding Takings "Accidents": A Tort Perspective On Takings Law, Eric Kades
University of Richmond Law Review
Viewing the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment as a form of insurance appeals to our intuition. The government, like fire, does not often "take" property, but when faced with extraordinary risk property owners naturally desire compensation. Recent scholarship, however, has dissolved the attractiveness of this perspective. This literature, through economic analysis, claims that the Takings Clause should be repealed and replaced with private takings insurance. This is the "no-compensation" result.
Enforcing Competition Through Government Contract Claims, Michael K. Love
Enforcing Competition Through Government Contract Claims, Michael K. Love
University of Richmond Law Review
One of the principal objectives of Congress in enacting laws to govern federal government contract awards is to insure competition by maximizing the number of contractors who compete for these contracts. To insure full and open competition, the specifications in government contracts must permit all responsible sources of goods, services, and construction to compete for the work. Specifications which are drawn so that only one source or a very limited number of sources can compete for the work may effectively thwart competition. Whether and how to enforce this requirement for competitive specifications during contract performance is this article's subject.
Mandatory Dedication Of Public Sites As A Condition In The Subdivision Process In Virginia, Robert L. Dolbeare
Mandatory Dedication Of Public Sites As A Condition In The Subdivision Process In Virginia, Robert L. Dolbeare
University of Richmond Law Review
The growth pressure on the suburban and rural counties in Virginia in the seventies should be as great as that experienced by counties in the Boston to Washington corridor in the sixties. This urban corridor is working its way south.
Government Contracts For Subsurface Excavation: Misrepresentation And Change Of Conditions
Government Contracts For Subsurface Excavation: Misrepresentation And Change Of Conditions
University of Richmond Law Review
Throughout the current century, federal, state and local governments have engaged the services of private construction companies in an increasing number of governmental construction projects. Many of these projects, such as the construction of roads, tunnels, dams, bridges, and buildings, require, at least to some degree, subsurface excavation. This comment deals with some of the legal problems facing contractors and governmental agencies in such excavation, and suggests possible solutions to these problems.