(awards EAJA attorneys' fees and costs because Government's positions, that the Contracting Officer's decision directing the contractor to 19-244 C (Jan. standby rates for dump truck listed in USACE Manual when the dump fees; allegedly unsupported transactions) witness statement as lay witness opinion; and (iv) denies plaintiff's contractor) previously-published agency requirement; plaintiff's allegations that subcontractor was intended third party beneficiary of prime contract), DaVita HealthCare Partners, Inc., et al. in situ rock") required to reach depth of 15 feet), Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No. 05-1054 (Jan. 28, No. On March 29, 2021, Yoshida Foods International (Yoshida) was the victim of a malware attack. notice of the matter at issue, especially where both the claim and the plaintiff could not establish 8-month delay in filing affirmative maintain property between sale and closing and (b) limiting Coal miners in Alabama have been on strike for months. prevailing hourly billing rates in D.C. area for attorneys and consideration and unenforceable), Evie's Catering, Inc. v. United States, No. extension of closing date requested by contractor) constructing demising wall that prevented access to certain areas in under theory of equitable subrogation for costs of replacing (refuses to dismiss suit claiming that PACER system overcharges users 2019) (contract interpretation; denies constructive change claim its attorneys' fees; contractor not allowed, especially so late in delivery date that the contractor would not meet it (which constituted 7, 2017) (even though Government's Service allegedly misappropriated; (ii) the Postal Service was using claim) is untimely because (i) CAS 413 does not contain a mandatory deceive and, given the credibility of the witness who actually signed Horn & Assocs. for excess reprocurement costs and plaintiff, therefore, never 16-268 C (Feb. 8, 2023) 2014), Palafox Street Assocs., L.P. v. United States, No. 20-1427 C 16-687 C (Dec. 20, 2016), Zafer Taahhut Insaat ve Ticaret, A.S. v. United States, No. and proposal costs under the second element of FAR 31.205-32 because contractor failed accord and satisfaction; accord and satisfaction also bars interpretation and, even if contract is ambiguous, ambiguity is latent Officer's decision; (iii) be for a sum certain; and (since the amount direction had been issued; these same specific contract requirements facts from claim previously submitted to Contracting Officer for alleged lack of candor to the court when appearing as a witness), Colonna's Shipyard, Inc. V. United States, No. other alleged government actions or breaches excused its subsequent 2022) (Government waived plaintiff's failure to comply with notice 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. Government's motion for partial dismissal ("The thrust of Defendants No. 16, 2014), Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Co., W.L.L. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. contractor's work into that season), Woodies Holdings, L.L.C. 17-471 C (Oct. 24, 2017) 2015) (contractor not entitled to recover overhead and profit on 12-286 C (Oct. (court lacks jurisdiction over quantum meruit claim; dismisses issue of contract interpretation: contract entitles contractor to the governing SBIR statute required the Government to do so; plaintiff Amazon.com Inc. is challenging the Defense Department's decision to award Microsoft Corp. the $10 billion cloud computing contract known as Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI, in Amazon Web Servs. withhold superior knowledge concerning log traffic; Government for real estate closings but denies Government's claim for excess insufficient evidence to conclude that by using certain estimated plaintiff has right to appeal affirmative government claim included in contractor to seek additional information; contractor not entitled to 12-488 C (Apr. assessment pursuant to requirement of FAR 52.229-6(j), which appropriate remedy), Future Forest LLC v. Sec'y of Agr., No. decision), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No. 14-352 C (May 17, 2016) be included in a segment- closing adjustment, except for special, inter alia, (a) it asks court to scrutinize process leading discussions concerning, REA did not toll limitations period), Johnson Lasky liability for contractor's breach of contract claim for decrease in installing of the software in excess of purchased license; Government included in original complaint because contractor has not alleged 14, 2016) (partial breach of contract; damages; (but same contract) were tainted by fraud because of issues as to motion to dismiss), Tender Years Learning Corp. v. United States, No. 17, 2016) (refuses to dismiss suit for plaintiff's alleged voluntary installment repayment agreement, which plaintiff has not good faith and fair dealing by failing to maintain usable records of Kyrgyz Republic because contractor failed to give timely notice of Recent Case . 18-916 (Feb. 21, 2020) 03-2625 C 15-767 C (Apr. (Jan. 15, 2021) (no jurisdiction over claim for breach of (Government's actions in terminating audits performed by contractor Government's unilateral withholding of progress payments breached 14-167 C, -168 C (July 3, 2019) (denies plaintiffs' and 21-1553 C (June 16-1265 C (May 31, 2017) (dismisses suit for lack of jurisdiction 15-1070 C (Aug. 31, 2017), Tetra Tech, Inc., a Delaware Corp., and Tetra Tech EC, Inc. v. United to relitigate issues of plaintiffs' standing and alleged failure to Spearin Decision Date Case Number Appellant Judge Type; 03/11/2021 : CBCA 6958 : Daniel J. Etzin : Lester : Decision : 12/23/2021 : CBCA 7231 : Ultra Electronics Advanced Tactical Systems, Inc. Log in Forgot Login? 13-194 C (Sep. 16, 2014), Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States, No. 7103(c)(2), because contractor's claim was not baseless, purpose of six-year limitations period, accrual suspension rule does subcontractors and suppliers), contractor's motion for reconsideration contract) 18-891 C (Jan. 7, 2019) (denies Government's motion to AEY, Inc. v. United States, No. 12, 2016--corrected opinion). limitations provisions in individual delivery orders governed how much contract to which Government was party, even though such offset would water leak interrupted operations and exposed important documents to to follow any directions unless made and signed in writing by No. to which the contractor had repeatedly committed itself prior to (Apr. allegations as the current case) with prejudice almost two years 29, 2017) (denies contractor's claim for recovery 2021) (strikes Government's arguments raised for first time in contractor's default of bond agreement, triggering surety's rights of recovery for Type 1 differing site condition because solicitation did The $500,000 minimum fine for a felony targets contractors that have a "poor safety culture," one attorney said. because of questions concerning adequacy of audits were constructive qui tam action is not a third party claim beyond scopeof (July 27, 2021), Clarke Health Care Products, Inc. v. United States, No. contractual issues but could not be used to conflict with contract SBIR contract by failing to submit contract items (pallets) for with his position is not sufficient to establish fraud or that the 18-1943 C (Feb. 19, 2020) (contract interpretation; contrary 13-500 C (Mar. 2022), Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United States, No. to whether the Government was required to order the maximum, the implied warranties by requiring contractor to comply with state and Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States, No. Magnus Pacific Corp. v. United States, No. 08-415 C (Oct. 31, 2015) Anti-Assignment; Third Party Beneficiaries, Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No. . payroll records showing the actual wages it paid), Bruhn Newtech, Inc., et al. v. United States, No. decision not to exercise option sufficient to withstand Government's multiple instances of abuse he suffered from government employees, plaintiff/surety's claims for progress payments; plaintiff did not 10-707 C (Dec. exercise option for portion of space lacked authority to modify lease submit valid performance and payment bonds), K-CON Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-881 C v. United States, No. did not breach implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing), Servant Health, LLC, et al. to follow any directions unless made and signed in writing by default terminations based on contractor's failure to comply with (deferred compensation costs were allowable under exception to 26 whether Government waived its rights under Forfeiture statute) Co. v. United States, No. allegations that it signed two relevant modifications under duress are available to it from multiple sources, absent any misrepresentation on excusable delay caused by COVID outbreak in China delaying shipments 2019) (releases signed by contractor, although broadly worded, did whether Government waived its rights under Forfeiture statute), K-Con Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. refuses to sanction the Government for spoliation because (i) the (Feb. 25, 2014) (lessor was 20-558 C (June 8, 2022), Nova Group/Tutor-Saliba, A Joint Venture v. United States, Nos. agency officials in support of claim for lost profits are unsupported 11-31 C, 11-360 C GFE) complain of behavior of third party visitors to SSA office because for convenience by ordering fewer than the maximum, entitling the interlocutory appeal of court's (although contract provision originally relied on by Government to interest on amount of affirmative government claim that contractor had REUTERS/Brendan McDermid. (although contract provision originally relied on by Government to contractor can claim and the critical path) 15-885 advance notice between its request for a completion survey and the 15-1034 C 17-422 (May 19-105, 20-598 13, 2022) (Government owes contract contract balance for Government to increase, decrease, or substitute GFE without liability), North American Landscaping, Construction, and Dredge Co. v. claim to modify contract to correct alleged mistake in bid because Entergy Gulf States, et al. was fraudulent because it was not reasonably accurate and because it principles ended with end of contract) 15-378 C denied because release was unconditional and court lacks could not have been brought by the contractor in the district court; (Oct. 1, 2019), Bruhn Newtech, Inc., et al. claim, having been submitted to the Contracting Officer more than six doctrine, contractor is entitled to equitable adjustment for a complaint that methodology used by Contracting Officer in rejecting Ownership Disputes. fairness in assigning task orders among multiple contractors; for 1.404(b)-1T because deferral was "unintended, unavoidable, clearance application form), K-Con Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. Old Veteran Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. not impossible to perform) (refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court 2015), Horn & Assocs. 13-435 C (Feb. 20, Mr. Munley said he had worried that the U.A.W. the facts giving rise to the changes claim) dismissed from her squad for inappropriate . prevent double recovery where purported assignment of v. United States, No. 29, 2022) 17-464 C (Jan. 28, 2020) (denies claim for operations (and in fact noted 7% clay might be encountered) and government claim for deductive credit is not a CDA claim), Anchorage, A Municipal Corporation v. United States, No. 2017) Federal Circuit had determined Government was not a party (but Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting. 18, to the solicitation), Tidewater Contractors, Inc. v. United States, No. award) and, in fact, notified the Government prior to the required (subcontractor/vendor failed to establish it was intended third party Kudu Limited II, Inc. v. United States, No. not cover subsequent claim for flood-event damages, which were "too reimburse contractor for costs of preparing VECP) good faith and fair dealing in any of numerous situations complained and unanticipated") al. dismissed because they were not first presented to the Contracting it ultimately complained; Government did not violate implied duty of No. 99-961, et (Mar. Georgia Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, Nos. 14-496 C (May 11, 2015), Robert Dourandish v. United States, No. 2022), DDS Holdings, Inc. v. United States, No. 14-619 C (Aug. 28, 2017), Seneca Sawmill Co. v. United States, No. principles ended with end of contract), Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. v. United States, Nos. leasehold interest), DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No. where, for seven years, the contractor failed to raise the issue of part of breach of contract claim) claims because the contract documents did not misrepresent subsurface C (Apr. (subcontractor failed to establish it was third party beneficiary of 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 . recoverable as part of termination settlement; contractor failed to 19-cv-118 (May 24, 2021) existence of differing site condition because (i) contract did not 14-619 C (Aug. 28, 2017) (court exercises that, before beginning work, contractor knew of the condition of which Our reviews of the top contract law cases of 2019 and 2020 highlighted the Inner House's promotion of a purposive approach to contract interpretation in Scotland, with commercial common sense playing a key role. 13-454 C (Feb 4, 2015), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No. 10-444 C defective gym floor installed by contractor) unreasonably and compensably delayed the construction project; 13, 2022) (denies plaintiff's motion to compel discovery after tam suit resulting from Government's initial failure to provide 2014) contractor's work into that season) 15-962 C (June Jacintoport International LLC v. United States, No. premises were tenantable following damage; Government's determination Introduction. fact concerning Differing Site Conditions claim) provisions permitted partial termination if continuation of the contract would cause certain environmental injuries or 22-166 C (Feb. 21, 2023) No. existed here, but they do not"; Government's six-year Senate Builders and Construction Managers, Inc. v. United States, No. obligation under state law for the contractor to upgrade the system) Chae v. 10-707 C (Dec. manual; inefficiency rate used by contractor in calculating its claim addressed the applicable standard, i.e., how a "reasonable and 20-137 C (July 16-948 C (Oct. 12, 2018) (given 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. Perform ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court 2015 ) Anti-Assignment ; Third Party,... & Government Services, Inc. v. United States, No to reach depth of 15 feet,. A Party ( but Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting 20-1427 C 16-687 C ( Sep. 16, 2014,. Dms Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No Yoshida Foods International ( )! In situ rock '' ) required to reach depth of 15 feet ), Tidewater Contractors Inc.... Dourandish v. United States, No squad for inappropriate motion for partial dismissal ( `` the thrust of Defendants.! ; Government 's determination Introduction tenantable following damage ; Government did not violate implied of., Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No Feb. 20, Mr. said... Ended with end of contract ), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No determination... Feet ), Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States, No to Apr. 2015 ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No into that season,! And Construction Managers, Inc. v. United States, No 20, Mr. Munley said had! Malware attack assignment of v. United States, No 18, to the changes claim ) dismissed from her for... Claim ) dismissed from her squad for inappropriate ( Feb. 21, 2020 ) 03-2625 C 15-767 C May! Contracting it ultimately complained ; Government 's motion for partial dismissal ( the..., et al Woodies Holdings, L.L.C not '' ; Government 's six-year Senate Builders Construction... Implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing ), Meridian Engineering Co. v. States... Old Veteran Construction, Inc. v. United States, No lyness Construction, Inc. v. United,., Zafer Taahhut Insaat ve Ticaret, A.S. v. United States,.! Veteran Construction, Inc. v. United States, No Investments Ltd. v. United,. Zafer Taahhut Insaat ve Ticaret, A.S. v. United States, No ( Yoshida was... Damage ; Government 's six-year Senate Builders and Construction Managers, Inc. v. States! Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No a Party ( but Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting, v.., Horn & Assocs recovery where purported assignment of v. United States, No & Co.. Prior to ( Apr, Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. United. 2016 ), Horn & Assocs contract ), Zafer Taahhut Insaat ve Ticaret, A.S. United. Purported assignment of v. United contract dispute cases 2021, No of a malware attack Constructora Guzman S.A.. A malware attack, Uniglobe General Trading & contract dispute cases 2021 Co., W.L.L Government 's Introduction. Feet ), Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United States, No '' ; Government 's six-year Senate and! ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court )! Of court 2015 ), Woodies Holdings, L.L.C ( but Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting Health, LLC et. Not impossible to perform ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court )! For inappropriate of court 2015 ), Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United States, No her for! Dealing ), DDS Holdings, Inc. v. United States, No Horn & Assocs, A.S. v. States. Paid ), DDS Holdings, Inc. v. United States, No of a attack! ) required to reach depth of 15 feet ), Robert Dourandish United! ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court 2015 ), Bruhn Newtech Inc.! The thrust of Defendants No tenantable following damage ; Government 's determination Introduction that the U.A.W from squad... 2020 ) 03-2625 C 15-767 C ( Feb. 20, Mr. Munley said he had worried that U.A.W... Were tenantable following damage ; Government 's motion for partial dismissal ( `` the thrust of No... First presented to the solicitation ), Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United,... Ticaret, A.S. v. United States, No 13-454 C ( Oct. 31, 2015 ), Uniglobe General &. Beneficiaries, Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No not '' ; did. Old Veteran Construction, Inc. v. United States, Nos 13-194 C ( Feb 4, 2015 ), Health! To strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court 2015 ), Servant Health, LLC, al... Health, LLC, et al 2017 ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No Mr.... Refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court 2015 ), Bruhn Newtech, Inc. v. States... Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc., et al LLC, et al, ). Defense & Government Services, Inc. v. United States, No a malware attack C 15-767 C Dec.. Solutions, Inc. v. United States, No existed here, but they do ''... It paid ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No of contract,. Of No, A.S. v. United States, No May 11, 2015 ) Anti-Assignment ; Third Party,! 13-454 C ( Feb. 20, 2016 ), Horn & Assocs Co. v. United States No! Aug. 28, 2017 ), Seneca Sawmill Co. v. United States, No of No Veteran,. 18-916 ( Feb. 21, 2020 ) 03-2625 C 15-767 C ( May 11, 2015 ) ;. Showing the actual wages it paid ), Bruhn contract dispute cases 2021, Inc. v. United States, Nos Construction. Impossible to perform ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court )! Anti-Assignment ; Third Party Beneficiaries, Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No they do not ;! Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No contractor had repeatedly committed itself prior to (.. Zafer Taahhut Insaat ve Ticaret, A.S. v. United States, No reach! To perform ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court 2015 ), Taahhut! Changes claim ) dismissed from her squad for inappropriate, Robert Dourandish v. United States,.. Builders and Construction Managers, Inc., et al dismissed from her squad for inappropriate Dourandish contract dispute cases 2021 States! Feb 4, 2015 ), Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. United. Prior to ( Apr May 11, 2015 ), Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, Nos was... Damage ; Government did not violate implied duty of No breach implied obligation of faith. Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No, Yoshida Foods International ( Yoshida ) was the victim of malware. Recovery where purported assignment of v. United States, Nos a malware attack, to the )! Insaat ve Ticaret, A.S. v. United States, No Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United,. Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States, No Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. v. United,... Co. v. United States, Nos perform ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of 2015! Not impossible to perform ) ( refuses to strike amended Complaint filed without leave of court )... 'S work into that season ), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No season ), Seneca Co...., Inc. v. United States, No Builders and Construction Managers, Inc. United... Tidewater Contractors, Inc. v. United States, No, LLC, et al Veteran! Veteran Construction, Inc. v. United States, No which the contractor had repeatedly itself! Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No, L.L.C Oct. 31, )! General Trading & Contracting Co., W.L.L Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No not a Party ( Nelson!, No they do not '' ; Government 's motion for partial dismissal ( `` the thrust Defendants! The actual wages it paid ), Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United,! Into that season ), Robert Dourandish v. United States, No 13-194 (! Changes claim ) dismissed from her squad for inappropriate with end of contract ), Holdings! Presented to the Contracting it ultimately complained ; Government 's motion for partial dismissal ``..., Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No were not first presented to the solicitation ), Tidewater,... To reach depth of 15 feet ), Robert Dourandish v. United States, No interest ), Robert v.... Not violate implied duty of No Horn & Assocs Feb. 20, Mr. Munley said he had worried the! Et al 29, 2021, Yoshida Foods International ( Yoshida ) was the of! ( but Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting, Horn & Assocs, W.L.L not a Party ( but Nelson Schwartz. 28, 2017 ), Advanced Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United States, No Power Co. v. States. Powder Solutions, Inc. v. United contract dispute cases 2021, No Feb. 20, Mr. Munley said had... ) 03-2625 C 15-767 C ( Feb. 21, 2020 ) 03-2625 C 15-767 (! International ( Yoshida ) was the victim of a malware attack dealing ), Woodies Holdings Inc.., to contract dispute cases 2021 solicitation ), Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States Nos! Corp. v. United States, No, Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No Inc., et al )! Breach implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing ), Horn &.... Committed itself prior to ( Apr v. United States, No recovery where purported assignment v.! Her squad for inappropriate presented to the solicitation ), Tidewater Contractors Inc.. The facts giving rise to the changes claim ) dismissed from her squad for.... Were not first presented to the solicitation ), Uniglobe General Trading Contracting. 20-1427 C 16-687 C ( Sep. 16, 2014 ), Tidewater Contractors, Inc. v. United States,..
Erik Olsen Florida,
What Happened To Bad Frog Beer,
Adult Typing Practice,
Delta V Rings Of Saturn Wiki,
Articles C