Morris-Griffin Corporation v. C L Service Corp.

3 Citing cases

  1. Concord Crossroads, LLC v. Human Capital Res. & Concepts, Inc.

    Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-00589 (RDA/IDD) (E.D. Va. Jun. 10, 2021)

    “The federal government sets aside approximately one quarter of its actual procurement budget for the procurement of goods and services from small business concerns, ” which are also known as SBCs. Morris-Griffin Corp v. C&L Serv. Corp, 731 F.Supp.2d 488, 490 (E.D. Va. 2010). The U.S. Small Business Administration's (“SBA”) 8(a) Business Development program is designed to “provide a level playing field for small businesses that are owned by socially and economically disadvantaged people or entities[.]” U.S. Small Business Administration, 8(a) Business Development Program, https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistanceprograms/8a-business-development-program (last visited May 18, 2021).

  2. Rundgren v. Bank of New York Mellon

    777 F. Supp. 2d 1224 (D. Haw. 2011)   Cited 33 times
    Holding that "the statute of limitations in [Hawaii Revised Statutes] § 480-24 may be tolled for fraudulent concealment"

    The cases Plaintiff cites in support of this claim are distinguishable because they do not involve affirmative claims for unenforceability or illegality of a contract. See Morris-Griffin Corp. v. C L Serv. Corp., 731 F. Supp. 2d 488, 501 (E.D. Va. 2010) (finding that plaintiff was not entitled injunctive relief of enforcement of the contract where contract violated federal law); Couldock Bohan, Inc. v. Societe Generale Sec. Corp., 93 F. Supp. 2d 220, 234 (D. Conn. 2000) ("Plaintiff, having violated the federal and state statutes, does not have the right to enforce the clearing agreement."); Entm't Publ'ns, Inc. v. Goodman, 67 F. Supp. 2d 15, 18-20 (D. Mass. 1999) (discussing defendant's "affirmative defense of illegality").

  3. In re Sagecrest II LLC

    Case No. 08-50754 (AHWS) (Bankr. D. Conn. Dec. 23, 2015)

    " Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Mullins et al., 455 U.S. 72, 77 (1982). Further, when federal courts are acting as courts of equity, they should be even more reluctant to recognize agreements which are tainted with illegality. See, e.g., Morris-Griffen Corp. v. C&L Serv. Corp., 731 F. Supp.2d 488, 496 & 502 (E.D. Va. 2010). Contrary to Equal's attempt to characterize it otherwise, this is not the instance where two parties agreed to act together to combine their bids to raise their offer, which courts have found to be non-collusive. Cf.