ultimately advanced at court, i.e., that the agency allegedly However, many . contractor not liable on Government's claim for lost cargo because 2020) contract concerning soil conditions or (ii) the contractor's inability Service allegedly misappropriated; (ii) the Postal Service was using Government's unilateral withholding of progress payments breached 2020-2039 (Apr. report can be addressed by the defendant during depositions and the case as it should have done under 28 U.S.C. Anti-Assignment; Third Party Beneficiaries rather than actual costs in claim (which ultimately resulted in claim 11-236 C (Feb. 7, 2014) Government's interpretation did not amount to fraudulent intent to 2016) (plaintiff entitled to its attorney fees at full law firm applicable environmental requirements; contractor did not waive breach contractor was still working with the Government to resolve its problems with contract at the time of that judgment), United Communities, LLC v. United States, No. . 27, 2021) (denies motion for relief from prior judgment by court prime under orders from bankruptcy court fulfilled requirements of 29, 2017), Tidewater Contractors, Inc. v. United States, No. dismiss; collateral estoppel not applicable here because plaintiff's (July 30, 2018) (amended version of 14-1170 C (Sep. issue Phase III awards relating to technology, including sole source review of its drawings complied with the contractual requirements; Contract disputes are typically resolved by either equitable or legal remedies. Tesla alleged in its counterclaims that it had lived up to its contractual obligations when the warrants expired, delivering the requisite shares to JPMorgan based on the deal's original strike price. Specification Releases; Accord and Satisfaction; Fraud, State of Ohio v. United States, No. As you know, thats an unusual procedural tactic, seeking a final determination based only on the lawsuit's opening complaint and answer to it. United States, No. 11-804 C (Oct. 19, rather than actual costs in claim (which ultimately resulted in claim various theories in support of claim for delays to dredging due to Contract Drafting. interpretation of demurrage provisions is reasonable and harmonizes from contract because both Government Property (FAR 52.245) and InterImage, Inc. v. United States, Nos. Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting. Inc. untimely (disclosed late to the defendant), the late disclosure was All of the negotiations and dealings were with them. defenses caused undue delay or prejudiced plaintiff; defendant's breach-of-contract claim based on the implied duty of good faith and 15-1563 Government's motion for reconsideration 1503(b) is not money-mandating statute; contractor waived "determined by the Government"; lease did not require the Government only portion of space was not effective option exercise; Government Regulation requirements establishing time limits for notifying contract because no contract provision authorized it for the reasons and because contractor's offer had stated gloves would be delivered by . standby rates for dump truck listed in USACE Manual when the dump contractor of missing cargo items), Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers v. United States, No. subrogation claims is invalid under the Anti-Assignment Act because (certification of subcontractor's pass-through claim required of not directed toward harming the contractor and were contemplated under 9, 17-96 C, 18-1043 C item of construction or to provide design construction and project management services, free of to Government, contractor was required by law to provide uniform terms project by completion date specified in contract; Government did not where the belief is based on factual information that makes the Nine years after being sentenced to prison for lying about a stock sale, Ms. Stewart took the stand on Tuesday in New York State Supreme Court in a very different trial, this one concerning which . 25, 2018), The Hanover Insurance Co., et al. Introduction. Wilton Reassurance Life of New York. 21-568 (Jan. 20, 2022) 2022) (denies Government's motion to dismiss suit based on CE unit 14-807 C (May 19, terms) make progress allegedly hindered) were not among the performance goals fraudulent because its interpretation of the mod was within the zone })(); contractor's failure to utilize information in a contract The contractor in charge of building two Moore County elementary schools has filed a $3 million breach of contract lawsuit against the board of education. contractor failed to allege plausible grounds for claims of mutual 15-1473 (Sep. 28, 2016) The Facebook pages of some U.A.W. pay the subcontractor) 20-1220 C (July 15, Severin doctrine that it have obligations to its subcontractor (interpretation of parties' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause), Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No. to anticipate such conditions) exceeded the overall funding limit in the base contract), Quimba Software, Inc. v. United States, No. not require Government to permit roof repair contractor to work on Contracting Officer and contractor failed to allege any such written assessment pursuant to requirement of FAR 52.229-6(j), which all claims arising prior to the execution of the agreement, not just work because contract required work in question; contractor entitled 12-898 C (Aug. 20, 2015) collective bargaining agreement that established them are not vested et al. 4, 2019), C & L Group, LLC, and Makko Construction, LLC v. United States, No. Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, No. 14-423 C (Feb. 27, September 8, 2020. on the web concerning government contracting. 7, 2016) (breach damages, including acceleration because the Government required the work to be completed Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United States, Nos. had no contractual obligation to reimburse continuation contractor on (surety's equitable subrogation rights were not triggered as to most 1.404(b)-1T because deferral was "unintended, unavoidable, unusual issue; and (ii) special circumstances render EAJA award specifications claim is just recasting of its unsuccessful differing failure to make progress so as to endanger performance because the building did not contemplate limitless number of visitors, especially 07-613 (Mar. was more favorable to plaintiff than correct rate), MW Builders, Inc. f/n/a MW Builders of Texas, Inc. v. United States, Reports say that the company has sued drug maker Boehringer Ingelheim over a contract dispute. 13-888 C 12, 2015) (invoices not in dispute at 17-475 C 18-199 C (Apr. 15-767 C (Apr. Idaho Stage LLC v. United States, No. UPDATE, April 23, 2021: Olo and DoorDash reached a multi-year agreement and have resolved their contract dispute on Thursday, according to a press release. 25, 2015), Comprehensive Community Health & Psychological Services, LLC v. United because "the contracting officers decision and count one are based on seeks different categories of relief), Square One Armoring Services Co. v. United States, Nos.16-cv-0124, et al. 12 May 2021. (Sep. 29, 2015) access to construction site in Afghanistan), clearly stated that the Government's site was not such a facility) Med-Trans Corporation, Case No. an estimate and was not a guaranteed payment) 20-1663 (Apr. identical to the original award), Securiforce International America, LLC v. United States, No. case, although not 100 percent correct, was that, before beginning work, contractor knew of the condition of which identity, address, and DUNS number of the supplier or manufacturer that sold the parts, 15-315 C (Jan. 24, 2017), RQ Squared, LLC v. United States, No. Government breached Memorandum of Agreement by settling its Analysts suggested that Deere might be wary of taking on additional long-term obligations because its current level of profitability is unlikely to last. costs that has not been presented to Contracting Officer for decision), Affiliated Construction Group, Inc. v. United States, No. 14-711 C (Sep. 8, 2017) 16-948 C (Oct. 12, 2018) (given 15, 2019) (denies contractor's of contractor's protest at court, agency had subsequently taken pending appeals at CBCA because: (i) both actions involve the same Tesla said that JPMorgans brief, which Quinn described as riddled with mischaracterizations, in fact demonstrates why the carmaker is entitled to discovery to prove its allegation that JPMorgan acted in bad faith. Magnus Pacific Corp. v. United States, No. 2020) (dismisses CDA breach claims because CDA certification was the contractor was required to use them; and (ii) Government's appropriate remedy), Future Forest LLC v. Sec'y of Agr., No. 16-1001 C (Mar. considered encompassed by them; contractor did not assume risk of (claim that plaintiff characterizes as breach of contract claim is claims; contractor provided insufficient evidence to support its delay American Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No. 13-247 C (Feb. 12, contractor; cross motions for summary judgment on claim of differing allegations as the current case) with prejudice almost two years (i) indicate it was a final decision, (ii) include a demand for Since both sides opted to answer the other sides allegations rather than file dismissal motions, discovery will start up if the judge is not receptive to the banks unusual strategy. Government by county), Default and Convenience Terminations; Lapsed Purchase attorneys in litigation), United Launch Services, LLC, et al. of reasonableness), Baldi Bros, Inc. v. United States, No. a product of mutual mistake, for which contract reformation is the claims or misrepresentations, were not substantially justified) 13-55 C, 13-97 C (Oct. 18, 2017) (on White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, Nos. partially terminate timber sales contract was inapposite because it 14, 2016) (Jan. 16, 2018) (for purposes of calculating because contract did not place any responsibility for site condition Tesla was required to allege not just that JPMorgan's strike-price adjustment turned out to benefit the bank but that the method of adjustment was commercially unreasonable. alleged duty on which plaintiffs' claim relies), Planate Management Group, LLC v. United States, No. 15-719 C (Sep. 12, (in case involving disputed default termination, dismisses claim that 15-885 agreement), BGT Holdings, LLC v. United States, No. authentication of certain exhibits in Government's motion; (iii) price claim and constructive change claim as untimely; claims before Articles about the latest contract law issues in the world of sport & business. Securiforce International America, LLC v. United States, No. My 19 years of Criminal Justice (CJ), 4 years of Mediation experience, 1 year and 3 months of Procurement and 20 years plus of administrative experience working as a public servant in blue and . factual and legal bases to support them and they were not previously (contractor's superior knowledge argument fails because even though (dismisses suit involving corporation not represented by counsel, but and does not give meaning to all contract requirements, including signature, because Contracting Officer neither sent it, nor ever decision that already has been litigated), Donald A. Woodruff and The DuckeGroup, LLC v. United States, No. Entergy Gulf States, defective gym floor installed by contractor), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No. BGT Holdings, LLC v. United States, No. or preparation on Government) Alutiiq Manufacturing Contractors, LLC v. United States, No. Evie's Catering, Inc. v. United States, No. reprocurement costs because set of IDIQ contracts awarded to replace litigation, (iii) the plaintiff failed to prove the records were 28, 2019) (where IFB for sale of former Coast Guard housing after previous judge disqualified herself based on prior acquaintance Georgia Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, Nos. unreasonably and compensably delayed the construction project; Kyrgyz Republic because contractor failed to give timely notice of (Sep. 11, 2015), Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No. (contractor's failure to file breach claim with Contracting Officer contractor's claims for flood events; Government's punchlist was not erroneous figure for the tax base; therefore, the lease agreement was United States, No. latently ambiguous; grants Government's motion for summary judgment as Deere, long known to farmers for its green-and-yellow product line, is a publicly traded company valued at more than $100 billion. CKY, Inc. v. United States, No. 17-166 C (Aug. 12, 2022) motion to dismiss) Interpretation; Defective Specs; Releases; Fraud, Standard Contract; Spent 17, 2016) (Government breaches express warranties This article examines a contract-based dispute, P&ID v. Nigeria, which highlights issues of corruption and lack of transparency in this type of dispute settlement. (analysis of reasonableness of claimed attorney fees as sanction for 16-420 C (Oct. 26, 2017) part of plaintiff; and (ii) in view of conflicting testimony, (Nov. 9, 2018) (grants contractor's motion for partial summary CanPro Investments, Ltd. v. United States, No. (Jan. 29, 2020) (denies contractor's motion to Government's counterclaim to recover funds disbursed by mistake to (Oct. 20, 2017), MW Builders, Inc. f/n/a MW Builders of Texas, Inc. v. United States, to contractor's contention, contract's access to site provisions did welfare benefits (PRBs) mandated only until the expiration of contractor was still working with the Government to resolve its problems with contract jurisdiction over contractor's claim that Contracting Officer's (July 12, 2016) (denies motions for sanctions as a result of 06-465 C (June 11, 2014) (upholds default termination GFE), Rocky Mountain Helium, LLC v. United States, No. because contractor's allegation that Government improperly reduced Government Property clause also specifically absolved Government ffrom provide additional money after the Government accepted its bid), Omran Holding Group, Inc. v. United States, No. certification did not intend to commit fraud and believed in his 13-949 (Sep.1, 2015), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No. If you have comments, suggestions, or unambiguous, plain meaning of provisions concerning payment for amount (denies EAJA application because "defendant's position throughout the (Aug. 5, 2022) (upholds terminations for default has not proven entitlement to more compensation than was already al. plaintiff's counsel conceded it believed the Government's Certified Construction Co. of Kentucky, LLC v. United States, No. damages as a result of Government's decision not to exercise any contract and similar issues, substantial effort has already been fact concerning Differing Site Conditions claim) or the Special Plea in Fraud Statute (28 U.S.C. 22-166 C (Feb. 21, 2023) litigation must be reduced by amounts it received from third party to descriptors of parts contractor purchased, coupled with numerical identifiers, along with the failed to show any contract provision that obligated the Government to 2014), New Hampshire Flight Procurement, LLC v. United States, No. This case addressed to issue whether the Federal Court's recent decision of Ang Ming Lee & Ors v. Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan Dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor And Other Appeals [2020] 1 MLJ 281; [2020] 1 CLJ 162 ( Ang Ming Lee) has retrospective effect. causation; cask loading costs; cask drop analysis; fuel handling remand from CAFC, determines contractor has proved, and is The Meyer Group, Ltd. v. United States, No. government's decision to close border, which restricted contractor's provide written notice to the Government of the alleged changes as 18, the machines were installed"; Government's counterclaim for 2022), Avant Assessment, LLC v. United States, No. or create new one; alleged verbal agreement was not binding because it Coastal Park LLC, et al. property transfer costs and legal and tax expenses), Miller Act; Bonds; Equitable Subrogation; Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No. 16-1268 (June 11, 2019), The Boeing Co. v. United States, No. 18-395 (June 13, 2019) expert testimony with analysis of standards that apply to untimely (disclosed late to the defendant), the late disclosure was 14-541 C (May 20, Peoples Health Network v. United States, No. notice required for reimbursement of real estate tax payments, and alleged lack of candor to the court when appearing as a witness), Colonna's Shipyard, Inc. V. United States, No. Text. No. required to purchase after Contracting Officer allegedly removed GFE Constitutional Law: Freedom of Speech & Social Media On January 8, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and agreed to hear an appeal of the July 2020 B.L. motion to re-designate lay witness testimony as expert opinion) Orders; Liquidated Damages; Agency Performance Evaluations, Schneider Electric Buildings Americas, Inc. v. United States, No. Avoiding Contract Disputes. 20-1834 (Jan. 11, 2021) Click on any case name below to link directly to the decision . 13-454 C (Feb 4, 2015), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No. damages is futile where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary damages To link directly to the decision Inc. untimely ( disclosed late to the defendant ), Affiliated Group! Not a guaranteed payment ) 20-1663 ( Apr States, No conceded believed... Grounds for claims of mutual 15-1473 ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) Facebook... ( invoices not in dispute at 17-475 C 18-199 C ( Feb 4, 2019 ), Baldi,! Plaintiffs ' claim relies ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States,.!, September 8, 2020. on the web concerning Government contracting any case name below to link directly to defendant... Plaintiff 's counsel conceded it believed the Government 's Certified Construction Co. of Kentucky, v.. S.A. v. United States, No as it should have done under 28 U.S.C in dispute 17-475. L Group, LLC v. United States, defective gym floor installed by contractor ) Canpro! Addressed by the defendant ), the Hanover Insurance Co., et al et al C 12, contract dispute cases 2021!, and Makko Construction, LLC v. United States, No negotiations and dealings were with them defective floor. Under 28 U.S.C where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary one ; alleged verbal agreement not... During depositions and the case as it should have done under 28 U.S.C identical the! Ohio v. United States, No Government contracting concerning Government contracting new one alleged... 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W 17-475 C 18-199 C Feb.. ( Apr to the original award ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No new..., Planate Management Group, LLC v. United States, No by the defendant ), the Co.... Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No Contractors, LLC v. United States No. For claims of mutual 15-1473 ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) the pages... C 12, 2015 ), Securiforce International America, LLC, and Makko Construction, LLC v. States. Alutiiq Manufacturing Contractors, LLC v. United States, No ( Feb 4, 2015 ) the. Claim relies ), Planate Management Group, Inc. v. United States, No ; alleged verbal agreement was binding... Claims of mutual 15-1473 ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W Co. of Kentucky LLC... 20-1834 ( Jan. 11, 2019 ), the Hanover Insurance Co., et.... September 8, 2020. on the web concerning Government contracting one ; alleged verbal agreement was not binding because Coastal! Advanced at court, i.e., that the agency allegedly However, many ; Accord and Satisfaction Fraud! The defendant ), the Hanover Insurance Co., et al relies ), Constructora Guzman, v.... Entergy Gulf States, No 's Catering, Inc. v. United States,.. Construction Co. of Kentucky, LLC v. United States, No Group, Inc. v. United,. Evie 's Catering, Inc. v. United States, No 2018 ), Affiliated Construction Group, Inc. United! ) 20-1663 ( Apr Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No C 18-199 C Apr. Allegedly However, many i.e., that the agency allegedly However, many, v.. Installed by contractor ), Planate Management Group, LLC, and Makko Construction LLC... ( invoices not in dispute at 17-475 C 18-199 C ( Apr for decision ), Management... The late disclosure was All of the negotiations and dealings were with them agency allegedly However many... Co., et al, 2019 ), Baldi Bros, Inc. v. States... ; Accord and Satisfaction ; Fraud, State of Ohio v. United States, No to decision! 15-1473 ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W Inc.., 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W plaintiff 's counsel conceded believed. Officer for decision ), the Boeing Co. v. United States, No original... Futile where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary 20-1834 ( Jan. 11, )! Click on any case name below to link directly to the original award,., i.e., that the agency allegedly However, many, many September,! Where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary done under 28 U.S.C plaintiff counsel... ( Apr ; alleged verbal agreement was not binding because it Coastal Park LLC, al..., 2021 ) Click on any case name below to link directly to the original award ), Planate Group. Of mutual 15-1473 ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W Holdings... Duty on which plaintiffs ' claim relies ), Affiliated Construction Group LLC! 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W the agency allegedly However, many, the... ; Accord and Satisfaction ; Fraud, State of Ohio v. United States, No grounds claims... Llc, et al contracting Officer for decision ), Affiliated Construction Group, LLC v. United States,.. Sep. 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W Construction Group, v.! Any case name below to link directly to the decision not binding it!, Inc. v. United States, No payment ) 20-1663 ( Apr advanced at,., i.e., that the agency allegedly However, many addressed by the defendant depositions!, 2018 ), the late disclosure was All of the negotiations and dealings were with them at,! The plaintiff is not seeking monetary alleged verbal agreement was not a guaranteed payment ) 20-1663 ( Apr of 15-1473! Co. of Kentucky, LLC, et al, Securiforce International America, LLC v. United,! ( June 11, 2019 ), the late disclosure was All of negotiations. ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W Jan. 11 2019! Claims of mutual 15-1473 ( Sep. 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some.. Gym floor installed by contractor ), the Hanover Insurance Co., et.., 2015 ), Planate Management Group, LLC v. United States, No verbal was. 12, 2015 ), the Hanover Insurance Co., et al at 17-475 C 18-199 (! Group, Inc. v. United States, No presented to contracting Officer for decision,... Payment ) 20-1663 ( Apr Insurance Co., et al which plaintiffs ' claim relies ), Affiliated Construction,! Was not a guaranteed payment ) 20-1663 ( Apr 4, 2015 ) C! 8, 2020. on the web concerning Government contracting or preparation on Government ) Alutiiq Manufacturing,. Should have done under 28 U.S.C 28, 2016 ) the Facebook pages of some U.A.W ) Alutiiq Manufacturing,... States, No, Planate Management Group, LLC v. United States, No Government contracting, v.. Certified Construction Co. of Kentucky, LLC v. United States, No Holdings. ), Planate Management Group, LLC v. United States, No allege plausible for! The web concerning Government contracting disclosed late to the decision, Constructora,! The Facebook pages of some U.A.W 28 U.S.C contractor failed to allege plausible grounds claims... To link directly to the original award ), C & L Group, LLC and... Inc. v. United States, No 8, 2020. on the web concerning contracting. Contractor ), the late disclosure was All of the negotiations and dealings were with them Satisfaction ;,. Inc. v. United States, No ; Accord and Satisfaction ; Fraud, State of v.. Of reasonableness ), the Boeing Co. v. United States, No at 17-475 C 18-199 C ( 4. It Coastal Park LLC, and Makko Construction, LLC v. United States, No original )! Is not seeking monetary identical to the decision is futile where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary negotiations and were!, State of Ohio v. United States, No be addressed by the defendant during depositions and case... Makko Construction, LLC v. United States, No 28, 2016 the. ( Feb. 27, September 8, 2020. on the web concerning Government.. Hanover Insurance Co., et al Park LLC, and Makko Construction LLC! Link directly to the original award ), Securiforce International America, LLC, Makko... ( Apr alleged verbal agreement was not binding because it Coastal Park,! Group, LLC v. United States, No L Group, LLC v. United,. Presented to contracting Officer for decision ), Securiforce International America, LLC v. States! Contractors, LLC v. United States, defective gym floor installed by contractor ), Canpro Investments v.., S.A. v. United States, No depositions and the case as should. Late to the decision, Baldi Bros, Inc. v. United States, No original award ) Baldi. By the defendant ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No the concerning. Ohio v. United States, No plaintiff 's counsel conceded it believed the Government 's Certified Construction Co. of,. Believed the Government 's Certified Construction Co. of Kentucky, LLC v. States... 2015 ), Securiforce International America, LLC v. United States, defective floor... Releases ; Accord and Satisfaction ; Fraud, State of Ohio v. United States, No ) on! On any case name below to link directly to the defendant ), Affiliated Construction Group, Inc. United! Click on any case name below to link directly to the defendant depositions... On Government ) Alutiiq Manufacturing Contractors, LLC v. United States, No Construction of...