6) Lear Siegler, Inc., Energy Products Division v. Lehman, 842 F.2d 1102 (9th Cir. 1988), withdrawn
Epstein Suite indexes the text; the original document lives at its official source. We don't host the original file — view it on the official release to read it in full.
View the original on the official releasePeople & organizations named in this document
Being named here is not an accusation of wrongdoing.
Document text
Text is machine OCR and may contain errors. Confirm against the original source above.
6) Lear Siegler, Inc., Energy Products Division v. Lehman, 842 F.2d 1102 (9th Cir. 1988), withdrawn
in part 893 F.2d 205 (9th Cir. 1990) (en banc): The President refused to comply with provisions of the
Competition.in Contracting Act that he viewed as unconstitutional and thereby allowed for judicial
resolution of the issue. The Ninth Circuit rejected the President's arguments about the constitutionality
of the provisions. The court further determined that Lear Siegler was a prevailing party and was
entitled to attorneys' fees, because the executive branch acted in bad faith in refusing to execute the
contested provisions. In this regard, the court stated that the President's action was “utterly at odds with
the texture and plain language of the Constitution," because a statute is part of the law of the land that
the President is obligated to execute. Id. at 1121, 1124. On rehearing en banc, the court ruled that Lear
Siegler was not a prevailing party and withdrew the sections of the opinion quoted above.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012394
Have a question about what this document contains?
Ask the documents