E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company v. The United States

Federal Circuit

E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company v. The United States

980 F.2d 1440, 38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,444, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 32179, 1992 WL 360168

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DecidedDecember 9, 1992

Docket92-5064

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 980 F.2d 1440 (E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company v. The United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company v. The United States, 980 F.2d 1440, 38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,444, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 32179, 1992 WL 360168 (Fed. Cir. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

ARCHER, Circuit Judge:

DECISION

The United States appeals the judgment of the United States Claims Court, E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. United States, 24 Cl.Ct. 635 (1991), denying its motion for summary judgment and granting Du Pont’s cross-motion for summary judgment. The Claims Court held that the contract between the government and Du Pont required the government to reimburse Du Pont for severance payments to its employees. We affirm.

DISCUSSION

The Claims Court fully and carefully considered all of the government’s arguments except one. The government contends that Du Pont engaged in “willful misconduct” in making the severance payments to its employees after it received a letter from the Secretary of Energy warning that the-government would not reimburse such costs. There is no merit to this argument. The Secretary’s warning letter did not cite or rely on any provision of the contract or other legal authority; it merely reflected the government’s dissatisfaction with the payment of severance to employees who would be rehired by Du Pont’s successor. In the absence of any contractual or legal basis for the Secretary’s position, Du Pont was not guilty of willful misconduct.

All of the government’s other arguments were properly rejected by the Claims Court and, accordingly, we adopt its opinion.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ARCHER, Circuit Judge:

DECISION

The United States appeals the judgment of the United States Claims Court, E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. United States, 24 Cl.Ct. 635 (1991), denying its motion for summary judgment and granting Du Pont’s cross-motion for summary judgment. The Claims Court held that the contract between the government and Du Pont required the government to reimburse Du Pont for severance payments to its employees. We affirm.

DISCUSSION

The Claims Court fully and carefully considered all of the government’s arguments except one. The government contends that Du Pont engaged in “willful misconduct” in making the severance payments to its employees after it received a letter from the Secretary of Energy warning that the-government would not reimburse such costs. There is no merit to this argument. The Secretary’s warning letter did not cite or rely on any provision of the contract or other legal authority; it merely reflected the government’s dissatisfaction with the payment of severance to employees who would be rehired by Du Pont’s successor. In the absence of any contractual or legal basis for the Secretary’s position, Du Pont was not guilty of willful misconduct.

All of the government’s other arguments were properly rejected by the Claims Court and, accordingly, we adopt its opinion.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

980 F.2d 1440, 38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,444, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 32179, 1992 WL 360168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ei-du-pont-de-nemours-and-company-v-the-united-states-cafc-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack