News & Analysis as of

Contract Terms › Materiality › Subcontractors

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

SCOTUS Holds Intent to Cause Economic Harm is Not Required for Wire Fraud, Expanding Liability

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kousisis et al. v. United States clarifies that criminal federal wire fraud does not require that the defendant intended to cause the victim economic harm....more

WilmerHale

Supreme Court Rejects Economic-Loss Requirement for Wire Fraud but Underscores Materiality as a Limiting Element of Federal Fraud...

WilmerHale on

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously declined to limit federal wire fraud to cases involving economic loss to the victim, upholding convictions of two government contractors who obtained contracts from a state...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Casting the First Stone: Contractors Considering Default Termination Should Examine Which Party Committed First Material Breach -...

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

During a construction project, circumstances may arise that lead a general contractor to consider termination of a subcontractor’s right to proceed under the subcontract. The Randy Kinder Excavating v. J.A. Manning...more

3 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide