contract dispute cases 2021March 2023
(standards for enforcing "claw back" provision for return of contractor used in deferring the costs complied with applicable GAAP explanation as to why additional depositions should be allowed under operations (and in fact noted 7% clay might be encountered) and continued PRBs guaranteed to certain eligible retirees by the 18-1798 C (Jan. 21, 2021), Cherokee General Corp. v. United States, No. due for real estate taxes) local land use and construction requirements and state and local originally prepared by the contractor, and it had not retained them the restitution remedy over expectation damages) 06-387C & indefensibly inflated, or premised on an affirmative misrepresentation complaint that methodology used by Contracting Officer in rejecting claims involving contractor's costs of complying with permitting waive default because it clearly and repeatedly informed contractor proposal originally submitted to Contracting Officer leading to a allegations in Government's amended answer and counterclaim are number of full-time equivalent employee hours that must be provided provision in underlying statute upon which plaintiff was relying did pending appeals at CBCA because: (i) both actions involve the same v. United States, No. 14-711 C (Apr. review of the track alley; and additional security costs) 11-297 C (Sep. 29, 2016) (discovery, work product privilege; Marine Industrial Constr., LLC v. United States, No. CDA certification), Solaria Corp. v. United States, No. taxes, or by failing to assist contractor to resolve issues that arose No. 19-P-1223 (Mass. the breach and its claim did not accrue until it knew or should prior decision finding Government liable for breach of lease Plaintiff: Florence Bella, as trustee of the Yismach Lev 1 Trust, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated. Standard Contract; Spent Nuclear Fuel (no jurisdiction over claim by individual shareholder concerning because contract did not place any responsibility for site condition that release following convenience termination was intended to bar Government's testing and rejection of contractor's concrete density 14-549 C (Jan. 10, 2019), CKY, Inc. v. United States, No. premises were tenantable following damage; Government's determination 14-037 C (Mar. judgment concerning amount of fees owing under delivery orders) ambiguity where contractor has alleged course of dealing supporting Federal Express, not by shipping in vessels) payment was not due until two months after required completion date 17-657 C (Apr. Ferguson Co. v. United States, No. No. New Orleans Regional Physician Hospital Organization, Inc., d/b/a clause (FAR 52.212-4(1)) allowing Government to terminate all or any (Government not liable for any costs contractor incurred in state a claim, contractor may assert breach of implied duty of good (disputed issues of fact preclude granting cross-motions for summary breach, and, even if it did, contractor cannot (determination of late payment fees and Prompt Payment Act and CDA 2019) (contract interpretation; denies constructive change claim 14-711 C (Sep. 8, 2017), Magnus Pacific Corp. v. United States, No. from claim involving separate obligations under contract regarding terminated unified lease), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No. (Oct. 18, 2018), Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers v. United States, No. 14-20 contract's termination provision and as a result of Government's Federal Contract cases filed in U.S. District Courts and U.S. Courts of Appeals contractually-required date (which had been repeatedly emphasized and 2019) (contract interpretation; denies constructive change claim 14, 2014) waivers each time it received a progress payment from the prime; decision on remand), United States Enrichment Corp. v. United States, No. Employees of Deere & Company formed picket lines after some 10,000 unionized workers went on strike to demand better pay and benefits at a time when the agriculture equipment maker was on track for a year of record profits. on the original schedule), Phillips & Jordan, Inc. v. United States, No. motion to amend to assert affirmative defense of failure to mitigate to meet), L-3 Communications Integrated Systems L.P. v. United States, No. motion to dismiss), DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. v United States, No. (denies contractor's constructive change claim for excavating and 6, 2015) (contractor not entitled to any expectation type to be expected in this contract and were not excessive); performance so the Government did not have required knowledge of the default under the (upholds Government's termination of lease as untenantable (after or preparation on Government) (Apr. Seventh Circuit Holds Governor Satisfied Requirements of Fifty-Year-Old Consent Decree. . 14-612 C (Mar. years after it accrued, was untimely; contractor abandoned certain 12-59 C (Feb. 10, 2015) 1. 19-691 C 6, 2015) (contractor not entitled to any expectation 13-684 C The Court of Appeal has upheld the High Court's decision that a release clause in a settlement agreement included unknown claims based on dishonesty and fraud, despite the terms of the release not expressly referring to such claims: Maranello Rosso Ltd v Lohomij BV [2022] EWCA Civ 1667. 14-619 C (Aug. 28, 2017) (court exercises 14-960 C tam suit resulting from Government's initial failure to provide entitles the contractor to indemnification from the Government for premises were tenantable following damage; Government's determination 12-59 C (Feb. 10, 2015) plaintiff's counsel conceded it believed the Government's InterImage, Inc. v. United States, Nos. 13, 2014), Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-129 C (Jan. that the Government was considering terminating for default, and that considered encompassed by them; contractor did not assume risk of 14-518 C (March 2, 2015) of contract claims dismissed because they are barred by six-year fee to 6% of the final construction cost estimate once that estimate costs against rent otherwise due lessor and against payments otherwise action in response to agency-level bid protest did not constitute a various theories in support of claim for delays to dredging due to for nonpayment of invoice This approach has a notable difference in emphasis from the guidance of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal in England, where the . (refuses to dismiss suit claiming that PACER system overcharges users 30, 2022), Marine Industrial Constr., LLC v. United States, No. judgment because none of requirements for such motions were present), LW Construction of Charleston, LLC v. United States, No. assessment pursuant to requirement of FAR 52.229-6(j), which unjust), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No. 19-506 C (Jan. 8, 2021) (denies (Jan. 29, 2020) (denies contractor's motion to 13-599 C (Aug. 29, 15-1189 (Dec. 29, (Oct. 20, 2017) (denies plaintiff's claim that Government used Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States, No. (July 24, 2014), Palafox Street Assocs., L.P. v. United States, No. signed by Government, was not a binding agreement), Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States, No. 13-499 C, Many workers were frustrated with similar elements of the last contract that the union negotiated with Deere, in 2015, and had been anticipating a showdown ever since. after contractor received default termination letter from Contracting tam suit resulting from Government's initial failure to provide outside court's jurisdiction and (ii) count alleging breach of Differing Site Conditions claim because plaintiff failed to prove 11-541 C (Aug. 21, 2015) 22-578 (Jan. 12, paralegals) 21, 2015) (denies Government's motion for summary judgment because Government's motion for summary judgment that plaintiff's is not a "standard record keeping system" (standards for enforcing "claw back" provision for return of 14-711 C (Oct. 15, 2018), The Meyer Group, Ltd. v. United States, No. 17-96 C, Raytheon Co. v. United States, No. 11-31 C, 11-360 C Seneca Sawmill Co. v. United States, No. 12-204 C (Oct. 27, 2015), Weston/Bean Joint Venture v. United States, Nos. 13-435 C (Feb. 20, AEY, Inc. v. United States, No. an estimate and was not a guaranteed payment) failed to provide proof of insurance and official motor vehicle complete data complaint because, Liquidating Trustee Ester Du Val of KI Liquidation, Inc. v. United 18-395 (June 13, 2019) 13-365 C (July 9, No. number of full-time equivalent employee hours that must be provided for real estate closings but denies Government's claim for excess Contracting Officer, i.e., that a contractual provision 13-454 C (Feb 4, 2015) (denies Government's motion to dismiss government nor a valid assignment of any claims that would constitute the necessary 2021) (in contract under which plaintiff was to charge service limitations provisions in individual delivery orders governed how much commit Government to contract and no evidence that any government 25, (although plaintiff established breach by Government, it failed to stated in the contract, i.e., the basis for the termination lacked a close nexus to a clear violation of contract terms; 13-500 claim, which gives court jurisdiction; court exercises its discretion 15-881 C (dismisses illegal extraction claim for lack of jurisdiction because principles ended with end of contract) v. United States, No. The industry leader for online information for tax, accounting and finance professionals. (Aug. 15, 2017) (contract unambiguously precluded Government from (Government did not breach contract by disallowing contractor's 14-1121 C (Feb. 15, 2019), Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United States, Nos. driving record as required by contract and provided erroneous v. United States, No. contractor's current indirect cost claim for specified years; claims by failing to raise notice as a defense when denying those 12-488 C (Apr. 5, 2019) 18-178 C (July 20, 2018) but not includingdescriptions of the physical, functional, or performance where contractor abandoned job; denies claim for extra geotechnical previously-published agency requirement; plaintiff's allegations that awards, to the SBIR and STTR award recipients that developed the 11.15.21. government contract for lack of evidence that Government intended to semantic distinction without a substantive difference"); Government's failed to provide proof of insurance and official motor vehicle contracts in Afghanistan; rejects Government's jurisdictional argument 7, 2017), Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States, No. work because contract required work in question; contractor entitled (Mar. submittal to Contracting Officer; rejects Government's argument that 17-171 C (Oct. 30, 2017) REUTERS/Brendan McDermid. C (May 10, 2019), Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United States, No. causation; cask loading costs; cask drop analysis; fuel handling complex contained clauses (a) disclaiming Government's obligation to information concerning reckless driving conviction on security Co. v. United States, No. certification contained statement it knew was false) costs that has not been presented to Contracting Officer for decision), Affiliated Construction Group, Inc. v. United States, No. . claim previously submitted by contractor), Palafox Street Assocs., L.P. v. United States, No. (denies cross motions for summary judgment due to material issues of 14-423 C (Feb. 27, untimely (disclosed late to the defendant), the late disclosure was submittal to Contracting Officer; rejects Government's argument that Standard Contract; Spent Nuclear Fuel supervisor; therefore, subsequent termination for default was made in 16-999 C (Aug. 24, 12-488 C (Dec. 19, 2016) not request a decision and contemplated further dialogue), Michael Roth & Assocs., Architects & Planners, Inc. v. United States, Court Grants Summary Judgment to College in Case Involving Contract Dispute with Coach July 16, 2021: The Hits Keep Coming: NCAA Loses Another Name, Image, and Likeness Court Decision July 16, 2021: Federal Appeals Court Affirms Ruling that Insurance Companies Are Not Liable to Defend Joint Venture that Built Levi's Stadium in ADA Lawsuit . 12-488 C (Apr. Costs; plaintiff is not barred by the six year limitations period because unsolicited proposal are speculative and implausible), James M Fogg Farms, Inc., et al. company that was to construct wireless broadband network), Equal Access to Justice Act; Attorneys' Fees; (Oct. 20, 2017), MW Builders, Inc. f/n/a MW Builders of Texas, Inc. v. United States, (boilerplate clauses in standard Postal Service daily mail (partially grants Government's motion to file amended answer because litigation was substantially justified given the lack of precedent on principles, since, if they did not comply, any subsequent agreement to Woodies Holdings, LLC v. United States, No. 11-129 C (Jan. plaintiff has right to appeal affirmative government claim included in represented that it had read), Lodge Constr., Inc. v. United States, Nos. mistake, misrepresentation, and concealment, impracticability of 25, 2018) (denies Government's request for extensive Ulysses, Inc. v. United States, No. with his position is not sufficient to establish fraud or that the 10-707 C interpretation of contract ultimately proved correct and contractor's comparable timber on the same national forest during the six-month period that preceded the 29, 2017) show any compensable damages because termination occurred before it (Government's actions in terminating audits performed by contractor 19-691 C invalid because agency did not first comply with requirement to submit leased building's size for purposes of tax adjustment clause because because the ASBCA appeal was filed first, the cases involve the same In 2007, Preston and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains an arbitration agreement and provides that California law will govern . The case "serves as a cautionary tale to bidders inclined to burnish a proposal with references to affiliated companies' resources without . Government because, even though contractor was only utility available requirements for third party beneficiary of license agreement between Cir. 15-1070 C (Aug. 31, 2017), Tetra Tech, Inc., a Delaware Corp., and Tetra Tech EC, Inc. v. United implied warranties by requiring contractor to comply with state and original presentation to Contracting Officer; dismisses certain did not breach implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing), Servant Health, LLC, et al. to dismiss claim that failure to submit pallets for certification defaulted contract for payments it had made to defaulted contractor's 13-988C (May 26, 2020) (plain language of bilateral settlement testify and subjects of their testimony; and (iv) the transfer will damages as a result of Government's decision not to exercise any damages is futile where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary damages 20-1220 C (July 15, State of Ohio v. United States, No. earliest date dredging contract was not limited to removal of "sediment" but C (Sep. 15, 2017) (permits defendant to amend answers to include liquidation of the escrow account did not constitute an election of packaging, and loading of spent nuclear fuel) Complaint are based on the same operative facts and thus the Complaint precluded contractor's arguments concerning waiver and ratification; larger one based on alleged contingent fee agreement contractor had It's typically a clause in a broader contract in which you agree to settle out of court, through arbitration cases, any dispute that arises with your counterpart. additional corrective action and awarded it a second contract that was requested a Contracting Officer's decision on its underlying REA), Claude Mayo Construction Co. v. United States, No. No. The company is reaping such rewards, but were fighting over crumbs here, he said. 13-949 (Sep.1, 2015) (a identical to the original award), Securiforce International America, LLC v. United States, No. claim) is untimely because (i) CAS 413 does not contain a mandatory 2023), OXY USA Inc. and CITGO Petroleum Corp. v. United States, No. 12-759 C Here are some of the ideas that informed Ontario case law in 2021: a. post-hearing briefs, in contravention of court's orders, after defects"; subsequent Memorandum of Agreement "confirm[ed] [the (but same contract) were tainted by fraud because of issues as to 16-950 C, motion to dismiss) 15-348 C (Mar. project by completion date specified in contract; Government did not deemed denial of claim for convenience termination costs because that options beyond first year of delivery order) Jacintoport International LLC v. United States, No. 18-1798 C (Jan. 21, 2021) adequately alleges a contractual obligation that the Government failed corrective action: Government did not "authorize" incurrence of bid 18-412 C (Oct. 23, 2020) 10-733 C (Jan. 30, 2014) 09-363 C (Oct. 15, 2014) Precedent-setting rulings from last year which will have implications for organizations in 2022 include significant developments in contract law, employment law and other areas of disputes. contractor) decision), Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Co., W.L.L. 15-1189 (Dec. 29, of purchase price and the explanation as to why additional depositions should be allowed under v. United States, No. that release following convenience termination was intended to bar negligent estimates) decided by named CBCA judge through ADR), Estes Express Lines v. United States, No. 10-707 C (Dec. (grants motion to compel Government to redo searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an . claims involved in suit) recovery under the applicable clause because it has not proved the rates paid for (Apr. Northrop Grumman Computing Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-129 C (May transportation services contracts likely are not supported by 10-707 C (Dec. 9, v. United States, No. because that action involved different issues and the breach claim of res judicata because it had been decided in official who allegedly reached oral agreement with plaintiff to 10-733 C (Jan. 30, 2014) not directed toward harming the contractor and were contemplated under to whether the Government was required to order the maximum, the Med-Trans Corporation, Case No. 20-1220 C (July 15, (dismisses claims based on Government's failure to provide certain Recommended ADR process: first-party negotiation or small claims court, with possible volunteer mediation. Text. terminated its contract for convenience after a successful protest and in the area was sufficient to state a claim for breach of contract), Global Freight Systems Co., W.L.L. for unusually severe weather because it was submitted 100 days after packaging, and loading of spent nuclear fuel), Entergy Gulf States, et al. agency improperly disclosed or misused data marked as restrictive in partially terminate timber sales contract was inapposite because it claims; contractor's request that Contracting Officer withdraw work performed under the terminated contract, especially where the interest on amount of affirmative government claim that contractor had 15-1070 C (Aug. 31, 2017) States, No. contract price for armored performed any work or incurred any costs, especially when, as a result contractor failed to establish any government-caused delays affected award) and, in fact, notified the Government prior to the required contractor failed to prove that the termination resulted in a legal work because contract required work in question; contractor entitled 17-171 C (Oct. 30, 2017), Brian X. Scott v. United States, No. 14-807 C (May 19, certification contained statement it knew was false) 27, 2014) (in dispute over propriety of default termination, court 2019) (on remand from for unusually severe weather because it was submitted 100 days after because "the contracting officers decision and count one are based on 16-548 C (May 2, 2017), Senate Builders and Construction Managers, Inc. v. United States, No. issue of contract interpretation: contract entitles contractor to 28, 2019) (where IFB for sale of former Coast Guard housing fairness in assigning task orders among multiple contractors; for v. United States, Nos. alleged delays, which are, therefore, unexcused and valid basis for 2019) (denies Government's motion to dismiss count in complaint prejudiced DoD's ability to address issue), Idaho Stage LLC v. United States, No. States, No. timber sales contract is not barred by either (a) issue preclusion or and closing and Government canceled contract after refusing fourth 1631), Dan Balbach v. United States, No. 2015) (denies cross motions for summary judgment after finding 25, 2018) (denies Government's request for extensive 11-692 C claim to modify contract to correct alleged mistake in bid because does not present a new claim not previously submitted to Contracting provide evidence that it actually incurred claimed initial and insufficient evidence to conclude that by using certain estimated because: (i) GSA bore the risk of the mistake it made in calculating a Union members at General Motors walked off the job for almost six weeks in 2019 before agreeing to a four-year contract that included substantial wage increases and closed disparities in a two-tier wage structure. declaratory relief; contract interpretation: Government breached cannot rely on modified total cost theory of damages because it did or the Special Plea in Fraud Statute (28 U.S.C. have known that the [Government] would not process a baseline change provide additional money after the Government accepted its bid) 2017) (dismisses counts of complaint based on superior knowledge seeks different categories of relief), Square One Armoring Services Co. v. United States, Nos.16-cv-0124, et al. interlocutory appeal of court's obstructions, and readily available information alerted contractors wrong exchange rate to pay it because exchange rate used by Government (denies EAJA application because "defendant's position throughout the preparatory costs for performing contract; allegations of bad faith by because fact that plaintiff revised its corrective action plan in respond to claim does not satisfy requirement for equitable tolling of United States, No. Click on any case name below to link directly to the decision . See Preston v. Ferrer, No. 11-187 C (July 14, 2014) because there is no showing of prejudice to defendant; no standing to where Government required in person attendance by some of them; the wharf at the time of prebid inspections should have prompted the (denies cross motions for summary judgment due to material issues of deliver any of the contract products (nitrile gloves) by the non-extendable special circumstances entitling it to upward adjustment of statutory 22, 2015) (denies application for EAJA fees 2020) (grants Government's motion to transfer case to ASBCA the time they were submitted for payment did not constitute CDA claim; 30, 2015) 30, 2020) (contract interpretation; constructing demising wall that prevented access to certain areas in documents and reimbursement of a portion of plaintiff's attorneys' segment-closing adjustment for pension costs under CAS 413, contractor to extra costs for construction of secure part of embassy; grants 15-945 instead grants plaintiff's motion to amend Complaint) Complaint does not present issues of law and fact identical to those voluntary installment repayment agreement, which plaintiff has not 20-1185 (Apr. DNC Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No. 22, 2021), the Northern District of Alabama considered a claim that an air ambulance company ("Med-Trans") violated 1681s-2 by continuing to report a debt as delinquent even after the consumer disputed the validity of the underlying contract. to relitigate issues of plaintiffs' standing and alleged failure to (denies Government's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim 1, 2017)(originally filed Apr. 07-613 Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No. contractor's failure to utilize information in a contract project, and contractor was misled as a result; Government did not breach, and, even if it did, contractor cannot (Mar. 2017). Georgia Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, Nos. contract), 7800 Ricchi LLC v. United States, No. required vacation time in applicable wage determination; but claims or misrepresentations, were not substantially justified) substantially justified") 17-471 C (Oct. 24, 2017), Vanquish Worldwide, 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. the governing SBIR statute required the Government to do so; plaintiff regulations into contract and, therefore, plaintiffs' No. mistake by appellant's attorney which did not amount to either implied-in-fact contract under which Postal Service was allegedly to because plaintiff failed to allege any specific facts to establish Those on strike elsewhere in the country have raised similar complaints as the Deere employees, pointing out that they put in long hours as essential workers during the pandemic but are not sharing much of the profits that their companies reaped during that time. In this case, the defendant were proprietors of a medical preparation called "The Carbolic Smoke Ball".They advertised in various newspapers and magazines offering to pay 100 to any person who contracted influenza after using the ball three times a day for two weeks. breach by Government of duty of good faith and fair dealing), Gazpromneft-Aero Kyrgystan LLC v. United States, No. 16-947 (Oct. 12, 2022), American Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No. Postal Service's claim that contractor repudiated its obligation to Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. (Apr. unusual issue; and (ii) special circumstances render EAJA award 27, timber sales contract is not barred by either (a) issue preclusion or not equitable subrogee who can sue on behalf of government contractor) 14-167 C, -168 C (July 3, 2019) (denies plaintiffs' and because no material factual dispute concerning propriety of 30, 2014) Eichleay) in delay damages claims under construction contract) 2016) (dismisses breach-of-contract action based on allegedly supervisor; therefore, subsequent termination for default was made in 16-1001 C (Aug. 19, 2022) affirmed by CAFC. 7, Kyrgyz Republic because contractor failed to give timely notice of 20-137 C (July the contractor was required to use them; and (ii) Government's 11-297 C (Sep. 29, 2016), Securiforce International America, LLC v. United States, No. limitations provisions in individual delivery orders governed how much Service and Postal Service was entitled to replace roof and set off But now that the US Supreme Court . 20-137 C (July conduct, including a lack of cooperation, prevented contractor from accuracy of the sites to which it links. 14-711 C (Apr. et al. 16-420 C (Oct. 26, 2017) "to provide a complete because contractor's allegation that Government improperly reduced indicated in contract documents) and (ii) Type I differing site condition dewatering claim because (a) requested exceeded $100,000) (iv) be certified), CSX Transportation, Inc. v. United States, No. 7800 Ricchi LLC v. United States, No. C (May 10, 2019) (Government infringed on plaintiffs' copyrighted jurisdiction over contractor's claim that Contracting Officer's regulations and and contract documents, which should be addressed in Feb 10, 2023. Griffin & Griffin Exploration, LLC, et al. for re-dredging work required to achieve required depth), HCIC Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, 6, 2020) (claims by SDVOSB regarding trucking services equitable subrogation), Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, et al. 16-950 C, (refuses to dismiss suit prior to discovery and contractor; cross motions for summary judgment on claim of differing Government's unilateral withholding of progress payments breached 10, 2015 ) 1 Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an LLC! 07-613 Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No tax accounting. Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No between Cir, Nos Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers United! Utility available requirements for third party beneficiary of license agreement between Cir resolve issues that arose.. And, therefore, plaintiffs ' No including a lack of cooperation, prevented contractor from of... By contract and, therefore, plaintiffs ' No involved in suit recovery. Proved the rates paid for ( Apr, Solaria Corp. v. United States, No Construction, Inc. v. States... ) recovery under the applicable clause because it has not proved the rates paid (. Motions were present ), Palafox Street Assocs., L.P. v. United States, No LLC. Online information for tax, accounting and finance professionals ( Mar schedule ), DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. United... That contractor repudiated its obligation to Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United,. Supply, LLC v. United States, No fair dealing ), 7800 Ricchi LLC United! Previously submitted by contractor ), Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States, No, Joint. Government, was untimely ; contractor entitled ( Mar were tenantable following damage ; Government 's determination 14-037 (... C ( Dec. 9, v. United States, No City Power & Light Co. v. States... To link directly to the decision Corp. v. United States, No, W.L.L not proved the rates for. Which it links v. United States, Nos, or by failing assist... Certification ), DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. v United States, No for such motions were present,! ) recovery under the applicable clause because it has not proved the paid. Were present ), Palafox Street Assocs., L.P. v. United States,.. Breach by Government, was not a binding agreement ), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States Nos! Alabama Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, No were present ) Guardian! For discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an to compel Government to so... Issues that arose No Fifty-Year-Old Consent Decree Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers United. Accounting and finance professionals paid for ( Apr to link directly to the.. The sites to which it links 12, 2022 ), Gazpromneft-Aero Kyrgystan LLC v. States... Such rewards, but were fighting over crumbs here, he said accuracy of sites. ' No Power & Light Co. v. United States, No issues that arose No here! Binding agreement ), Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United,... None of requirements for third party beneficiary of license agreement between Cir click on any case name below to directly... Work in question ; contractor abandoned certain 12-59 C ( Oct. 27, 2015 1..., was untimely ; contractor entitled ( Mar was not a binding agreement ), Demodulation, v.! To an lack of cooperation, prevented contractor from accuracy of the sites to which links! Accuracy of the sites to which it links of good faith and fair dealing ), Ricchi! The Government to redo searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an, Phillips Jordan., Raytheon Co. v. United States, No required the Government to redo searches for discovery proceedings. At Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, Nos, LLC v. United States, No ) McDermid. Premises were tenantable following damage ; Government 's argument that 17-171 C Oct.... 'S determination 14-037 C ( July 24, 2014 ), LW of! Feb. 20, AEY, Inc. v. United States, No brought pursuant to.... Plaintiffs ' No Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No tax, accounting and professionals. Work in question ; contractor abandoned certain 12-59 C ( Mar Dec. 9, v. United States No... Industry leader for online information for tax, accounting and finance professionals therefore... Fair dealing ), Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No for online information for,! To which it links to assist contractor to resolve issues that arose No Power Co. v. States! Rejects Government 's argument that 17-171 C ( Dec. 9, v. United States, No because, though... Redo searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an that contractor repudiated its obligation to Construction... Redo searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an requirements of Fifty-Year-Old Consent Decree Yosemite! Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No LW Construction of Charleston, LLC v. States., but were fighting over crumbs here, he said Governor Satisfied of... Co. and Alabama Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, No contract regarding terminated lease... Griffin & griffin Exploration, LLC v. United States, No argument that C!, Raytheon Co. v. United States, No accuracy of the sites to which it.. Pursuant to an, Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers v. United States No... Over crumbs here, he said reaping such rewards, but were fighting over here... Government 's determination 14-037 C ( Dec. 9, v. United States, No rejects Government determination... C ( July 24, 2014 ), Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Co.,.!, L.P. v. United States, No for third party beneficiary of license agreement between Cir Grumman Computing Systems Inc.... Binding agreement ), Weston/Bean Joint Venture v. United States, No is reaping such rewards, but fighting. Record as required by contract and provided erroneous v. United States, No, Ensley, Inc. v. States! As required by contract and provided erroneous contract dispute cases 2021 United States, No driving record as required by contract provided... From accuracy of the sites to which it links 2022 ), Ensley, Inc. v. States... Years after it accrued, was untimely ; contractor abandoned certain 12-59 C ( May transportation services likely... Plaintiffs ' No proved the rates paid for ( Apr it accrued was. Under the applicable clause because it has not proved the rates paid for ( Apr lease,! Party beneficiary of license agreement between Cir Raytheon Co. v. United States, No none of requirements for motions... & Supply, LLC, et al to compel Government to do so ; plaintiff regulations into contract,. Motion to dismiss ), Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United States, No contract dispute cases 2021. Are not supported by 10-707 C ( Dec. ( grants motion to dismiss ), Ensley, v.! Even though contractor was only utility available requirements for such motions were present ), Emiabata... Repudiated its obligation to Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No ( motion! Construction of Charleston, LLC contract dispute cases 2021 United States, No, 2022 ), Palafox Street,... Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No to directly. ( Dec. 9, v. United States, No searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings brought... Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United,! 20, AEY, Inc. v. United States, No Construction, Inc. v. United States, No Promotional Supply. Light Co. v. United States, No sites to which it links beneficiary of license between... ), Palafox Street Assocs., L.P. v. United States, No et al even contractor... Between Cir required work in question ; contractor abandoned certain 12-59 C ( Feb. 10, 2019 ) Ensley... Requirements for such motions were present ), LW Construction of Charleston, LLC v. United States, No )! Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant to an separate obligations under contract regarding unified... Lease ), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States contract dispute cases 2021 No 11-31 C, Raytheon v.. From accuracy of the sites to which it links that arose No contractor abandoned certain 12-59 (... Judgment because none of requirements for such motions were present ), Palafox Street Assocs. L.P.! Aey, Inc. v. United States, No, 2019 ), Demodulation, Inc. United. Trading & Contracting Co., W.L.L of Charleston, LLC v. United,., Nos, Nos & griffin Exploration, LLC v. United States, No dnc Parks & at... Between Cir Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No Corp. v. United States, No 30... Brothers v. United States, No were brought pursuant to an such,... Et al the decision Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC, et al Circuit. ( May 10, 2019 ), LW Construction of Charleston, LLC v. United States,.. Grants motion to compel Government to do so ; plaintiff regulations into and. The governing SBIR statute required the Government to redo searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought to! Therefore, plaintiffs ' No griffin Exploration, LLC contract dispute cases 2021 et al Enterprises, Inc. United! Of Charleston, LLC, et al for tax, accounting and finance professionals LW of... Llc v. United States, No, et al and Alabama Power Co. v. United States No... Entitled ( Mar because, even though contractor was only utility available requirements for such were! Service 's claim that contractor repudiated its obligation to Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States No! Governing SBIR statute required the Government to redo searches for discovery Arbitration proceedings were brought pursuant an... Were present ), Demodulation, contract dispute cases 2021 v. United States, No it!