Brad English

Government Contracts

Cybersecurity & Privacy

Unfair Competition, Non-Compete Agreements, and Trade Secrets Litigation

Brad is a trial lawyer in Maynard Nexsen's Government Solutions Practice specializing in Government Contracts & Bid Protests. His national government contract litigation practice takes him to state and federal courts across the county. Brad has first-chair trial experience representing contractors in litigation involving virtually all aspects of their business, including:

-Claims (CDA) litigation before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and Boards of Contract Appeal. Brad’s most recent cases involved negligent estimate, constructive termination, breach of contract, and wrongful withholding claims;

-Defending contractors facing claims under the False Claims Act;

-Challenging federal agency action under the Administrative Procedures Act;

-Challenging suspension and debarment decisions (including claims for de facto debarment and base debarment/exclusion);

-Disputes between prime and subcontractors, including claims involving teaming and workshare agreements, non-solicitation of personnel, and breach of contract;

-Employment disputes, including discrimination and retaliation claims;

-Prosecuting and defending claims involving non-competition and/or non-solicitation agreements and trade secrets; and

-Shareholder and derivative litigation.

In addition to traditional litigation, Brad actively represents contractors in bid protests and brings a seasoned litigator’s approach to proceedings before the GAO and the Court of Federal Claims.

Brad’s work for contractors often extends beyond the trial court level. He has served as lead counsel to contractors appearing before multiple appellate courts, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits.

Although contractors often call Brad after a dispute arises, he actively counsels them and gives them strategic advice to address corporate, employment, and other issues stemming from ownership, governance, and/or operation.

Brad is situated in Maynard Nexsen's Huntsville, Alabama office and also spends time in the Firm's office in Washington, D.C.

-Lead counsel in appeal of Court of Federal Claims’ denial of contractor’s claims for recovery of costs due to negligent government estimate resulting in a precedential opinion reversing the trial court. See Agility Defense & Gov’t Svcs, Inc. v. United States, 847 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2017).

-Lead counsel in CDA claim seeking reimbursement for legal costs incurred to successfully defend relator’s claims under the FCA. See Tolliver Grp., Inc. v. United States, 140 Fed. Cl. 520 (2018) (involving interplay between Part 31 principles and fixed price level of effort contracts); Tolliver Grp., Inc. v. United States, 146 Fed. Cl. 475, reconsideration denied, 148 Fed. Cl. 351 (2020) (granting summary judgment).

-Lead counsel in protest of contracting officer’s responsibility determination involving a major arms manufacturer. See Remington Arms Co., LLC v. United States, 126 Fed. Cl. 218 (2016).

-Lead counsel for intervenor on appeal of Court of Federal Claims’ denial of protest for a major transportation contract. See American Auto Logistics, LP v. United States, 599 Fed. Appx. 958 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

-Lead counsel on case of first impression regarding affiliate-based suspensions under the Federal Acquisition Regulations. See Agility Defense & Gov’t Svcs, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. of Defense, 739 F.3d 586 (11th Cir. 2013).

-Lead counsel in landmark decision addressing the extent to which the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (FASA) preempts Court of Claims’ jurisdiction under Tucker Act. Tolliver Grp., Inc. v. United States, No. 20-1108C, 2020 WL 7022493 (Fed. Cl. Nov. 30, 2020).

-Lead counsel in numerous bid protests. See, e.g., Harmonia Holdings Grp., LLC v. United States, 146 Fed. Cl. 799 (2020); Harmonia Holdings Grp., LLC v. United States, 145 Fed. Cl. 84 (2019); Harmonia Holdings Grp., LLC v. United States, 147 Fed. Cl. 756 (2020); Sys. Studies & Simulation, Inc. v. United States, 146 Fed. Cl. 186 (2019); System Dynamics Int’l, Inc. v. United States, 130 Fed. Cl. 449 (2017); TAT Technologies, Ltd. v. United States, 128 Fed. Cl. 109 (2016); CEdge Software Consultants, LLC v. United States, 117 Fed. Cl. 419 (2014) (representing intervenor); Great Southern Engineering, Inc. v. United States, 128 Fed. Cl. 739 (2016) (representing intervenor).

-Lead counsel in defense of contractors alleged to have violated the False Claims Act. See, e.g., U.S. ex rel. Searle v. DRS Services, Inc., et al., 2015 WL 6691973 (E.D. Va. 2015) (entering summary judgment), affirmed 2017 WL 715815 (4th Cir. 2017).

-Lead counsel in defense of contractor alleged to have terminated employees in violation of the anti-retaliation provisions of the False Claims Act. See Mooren, et al. v. System Studies & Simulation, Inc., et al., 2017 WL 3581727.

-Lead counsel for contractors involved in disputes with prime/sub-contractors, teaming partners, employees (particularly non-competition and non-solicitation agreements), and other contractors or third-parties. See, e.g., Int’l Auto Logistics, LLC v. Vehicle Processing Center of Fayetteville, Inc., 2017 WL 149815 (S.D. Ga. 2017) (entering summary judgment), affirmed 2018 WL 2472829; TechJect Innovations Corp. v. Bio-Cellular Design Aeronautics, Inc., et al., 2016 WL 5885541 (N.D. Ga.); Guest Associates, Inc. v. Cyclone Aviation Products, Ltd., 30 F.Supp. 3d 1278 (N.D. Ala. 2014).

-Lead counsel for contractors challenging agency action under the Administrative Procedures Act. See Sigmatech, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. of Defense, et al., 5:15-cv-00182 (N.D. Ala. 2015) (challenging termination of blanket purchase agreement and U.S. Army’s Aviation and Missile Command’s “re-greening” and “off-ramping” policies) Discussion: https://www.law360.com/articles/616644/sigmatech-slams-dod-for-terminating-missile-contract.