Opinion ID: 567285
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Identity of the Issues

Text: 15 The issue addressed by both the administrative judge and the district court was whether Bailes distributed project funds in violation of the regulatory agreements. The complaint filed by HUD with the Board of Contract Appeals charged Bailes with making disbursements from project funds in violation of the regulatory agreements. R1-4-Ex.E-2 at 5. The administrative judge recognized that this was an issue at the administrative hearing. R1-4-Ex.E-4 at 538 (HUD charged as grounds for debarment, that George Bailes violated the Regulatory Agreement ... [by] making unallowable distribution[s] of project funds....). The claim filed by the United States in the district court alleged that the regulatory agreements had been violated by the prohibited disbursement of project funds. Thus, the factual issue to be addressed by the district court was the same issue previously before the administrative judge.