Connection lost
Server error
Harvey Ward Locke v. United States Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The court held that a contractor whose requirements contract was improperly terminated by the government could recover damages for the lost opportunity to obtain business, even if the contract did not guarantee a minimum amount of work.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that damages for breach of a requirements contract can include the value of a lost chance for profit, provided a reasonable probability of damage and a basis for computation exist.
Harvey Ward Locke v. United States Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff, Harvey Ward Locke, held a requirements contract with the General Services Administration (GSA) for typewriter repair services in San Diego, California, for one year. His name, along with three other contractors, was placed on a Federal Supply Schedule. Government agencies (excluding the Department of Defense) were generally required to use contractors from this schedule but could choose any listed contractor. Plaintiff was the low bidder among the four. After several months, the government improperly terminated plaintiff’s contract for default. Plaintiff appealed to the GSA Board of Review, which found the termination improper but denied his claim for lost profits. Plaintiff then sued in the Court of Claims. Separately, plaintiff’s bid for a similar contract in Fort Worth, Texas, was rejected due to a finding of non-responsibility, a decision upheld by the GSA Board of Review, which found ample evidence for non-responsibility independent of the California contract termination. Plaintiff alleged this rejection was a foreseeable consequence of the California breach.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can a contractor recover damages for lost profits resulting from the government’s improper termination of a requirements contract when the contract did not guarantee any specific volume of work but only provided an opportunity to compete for available work?
Yes, as to the California contract, the plaintiff may recover damages for Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temp
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Can a contractor recover damages for lost profits resulting from the government’s improper termination of a requirements contract when the contract did not guarantee any specific volume of work but only provided an opportunity to compete for available work?
Conclusion
This case affirms that a party wrongfully deprived of an opportunity to Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor
Legal Rule
Requirements contracts are enforceable, and a party deprived of a reasonable expectation Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupid
Legal Analysis
The court rejected the government's argument that the California requirements contract's lack Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exe
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A contractor wrongfully terminated from a non-exclusive requirements contract is entitled