Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
271 F.3d 1060 (2001)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. (Hughes) (plaintiff) entered into an agreement with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under which NASA would use its best efforts to launch Hughes’ HS-393 satellites on NASA space shuttles until either ten HS-393s were launched or until September 30, 1994, whichever was earlier. After the Challenger explosion, NASA stopped launching commercial satellites on shuttles. Hughes launched three HS-393s and six HS-601 satellites on expendable launch vehicles (ELVs) instead of shuttles. Hughes sued the United States Government (defendant) for breach of contract. Hughes provided evidence that the HS-601s were more suitable for ELV launches and would not have been developed absent the government’s breach. A government report concluded that NASA could have launched five HS-393s during the LSA contract period using its best efforts. The court of federal claims granted summary judgment for Hughes and awarded damages to Hughes for its increased costs in launching five satellites, totaling more than $102,000,000. The trial court used the difference in the cost of launching HS-393s on ELVs instead of shuttles to calculate Hughes’ increased costs in launching the two HS-601s on ELVs. Both parties appealed the amount of damages.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rader, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
