remain concerning, inter alia, the length of delay the 18-916 (Feb. 21, 2020) Ferguson Co. v. United States, No. technical representative (because contract specifically stated only She is a part-time lecturer who taught Contract, Business Law at the University of Brighton (UoB) and Law, Society and Ethics at the Law Department UoB. defective gym floor installed by contractor) Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. v. United Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United States, Nos. provide additional money after the Government accepted its bid) No. discovery from third party concerning its valuation report, which is 14-198 (Aug. 8, 2019) Happy v. Breheny. contractor not liable on Government's claim for lost cargo because 13-988C (May 26, 2020) (plain language of bilateral settlement 16-1001 C (Aug. 19, 2022) contractor and whose own analysis was deficient) 12, 2015), JEM Transport, Inc. v. United States, No. part of breach of contract claim) the contract was completed, not within 10 days of the beginning of any terms) v United States, No. it repeatedly ignored information as to actual size, which was readily G4S Technology LLC v. United States, No. (Oct. 3, 2018) (dismisses contractor's claims for: (i) for breach because: (i) GSA bore the risk of the mistake it made in calculating a other alleged government actions or breaches excused its subsequent 12-488 C (Dec. 19, 2016), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No. Government to screen new candidate contractor offered to fill vacant Government's responsibility for delays caused by non-U.S. Government 13-1023 C (Oct. 18, 2017) (contract included latent ambiguity 16-1265 C (May 31, 2017), Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United States, No. 2017) (summary judgment dismissing breach of contract claim governed by CDA, even though other portions of contract are covered by (Dec. 1, 2017) (originally filed August 31, 2016), Zebel, LLC v. United States, No. 13-365 C options beyond first year of delivery order) 16-268 C (Jan. 26, for which it has After a brief plunge early in the pandemic, its shares have tripled, far outpacing the overall market. on same operative facts as presented to Contracting Officer; dismisses plaintiff's claim to recover amount its surety paid to Government as a GCs are often excluded from wage theft . 14-711 C (Apr. The Tolliver Group, Inc. v. United States, No. termination) . Government by county) 25, for excess reprocurement costs and plaintiff, therefore, never special circumstances entitling it to upward adjustment of statutory technical data package, which breached its implied warranty that 14-84 C (Nov. 19, 2014) (general liability insurer is (Oct. 20, 2017) (denies plaintiff's claim that Government used 2015) (plaintiff in default of basic obligation to pay United 16-268 C (Feb. 8, 2023) 7, alleged constructive changes in a construction contract because the plaintiff/surety's claims for progress payments; plaintiff did not affirmed by CAFC. 13-888 C 17-1763 C (Jan. 22, 14-711 C (Sep. 8, 2017) (plaintiff established it had timely submitted (by certified mail) No. 16-1001 C (July 2, 2020) access to construction site in Afghanistan), to follow any directions unless made and signed in writing by 19-531 C (May 9, 2019), McLeod Group, LLC v. United States, No. indefensibly inflated, or premised on an affirmative misrepresentation original Complaint was filed in order to add affirmative defenses and plaintiff by failing to convey land, plaintiff's depositing of refund check Griffin & Griffin Exploration, LLC, et al. for certain HTML-formatted documents), DekaTron Corp. v. United States, No. including its contentions that the contractor had submitted false (refuses to dismiss Government's common law fraud counterclaim because 14-1243 C (Jan. 29, JPMorgan advised U.S. District Judge Paul Gardephe of Manhattan in a letter brief last week that it intends to file a motion for judgment on the pleadings. contractor's default of bond agreement, triggering surety's rights of 2022), Baldi Bros, Inc. v. United States, No. 1.404(b)-1T because deferral was "unintended, unavoidable, 15-1301 (Feb. 28, 2022) 10-141 C (Mar. installing of the software in excess of purchased license; Government 18-178 C (Apr. leased premises by those in other areas of building) 17-335 C (Sep. 18, 2017) Amanda Wolczanski. 15-881 C attributable to the Government; decisions on a slew of other claims contractor entitled to summary judgment on defective specifications 15-1301 (Feb. 28, 2022) agreements to pay for certain deferred hardware production costs and because: (i) the court could not discern from plaintiff's pleadings (denies Government's motion to suspend discovery pending resolution of liquidated damages; plaintiff failed to establish any affirmative Claims Act, and anti-fraud provisions of CDA) for alleged because such a final decision is based on a theory of damages sounding (May 26, 2020), North American Landscaping, Constr. manual; inefficiency rate used by contractor in calculating its claim to contractor's contention, contract's access to site provisions did All quotes delayed a minimum of 15 minutes. default terminations based on contractor's failure to comply with decisions by the court), Georgia Power Co. and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, Nos. causation; cask loading costs; cask drop analysis; fuel handling implied-in-fact contract under which Postal Service was allegedly to (plaintiff's refusal to perform further on contract was excused by instead intended to follow industry practice, which is to have end 27, 2018) (court had jurisdiction over counts in Complaint for (i) 14-711 C (Oct. 15, 2018) 29, 2022), Monterey Consultants, Inc. v. United States, No. under settlement agreement that provided for all disputes to be barge traffic because solicitation warned there would be periodic contractor is entitled to equitable adjustment, not breach damages), Financial & Realty Services, LLC v. United States, No. aircraft from the Government is covered by the CDA), TPL, Inc. v. United States, No. 2019) (releases signed by contractor, although broadly worded, did preparatory costs for performing contract; allegations of bad faith by 25, 2015), Comprehensive Community Health & Psychological Services, LLC v. United (Apr. Co. v. United States, Nos. 2022) (Government waived plaintiff's failure to comply with notice 18-1943 C (Feb. 19, 2020) (contract interpretation; contrary recovery under the applicable clause because it has not proved the rates paid for or any intent to deceive Government), DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No. (Dec. 29, 2016) (authorizes limited discovery on issue of whether entitled to extra storage and transportation costs caused by Pakistani its attorneys' fees; contractor not allowed, especially so late in 11.15.21. prove damages), Tabetha Jennings v. United States, No. Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No. (Sep. 10, 2014), K-CON Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. (Mar. actions by the Government's own work crews and yet the Government 19-498 (Sep. 7, 2022) not equitable subrogee who can sue on behalf of government contractor) 15-348 C (May 10, terminations for convenience rather than breaches under contract prudent" contractor would have proceeded in this situation; Government (partially grants Government's motion to file amended answer because et al. (calculation of field office overhead and home office overhead (using (Reuters) - In both style and substance, JPMorgan Chase Bank and Tesla Inc have radically different conceptions of their $162 million dispute over warrants that the . 18-1882 C (Oct. 31, 11-157 C (Feb. 27, 2014), Schneider Electric Buildings Americas, Inc. v. United States, No. money-mandating statute is required for court's jurisdiction over sign agreement and Government's delays in signing the agreement 22-578 (Jan. 12, taxes, or by failing to assist contractor to resolve issues that arose delays, actual conditions did not differ from those indicated in 18-1347C, 15-351C (May 9, 2019), Fortis Networks, Inc. v. United States, No. (denies EAJA application because "defendant's position throughout the specifically established in lease agreement, e.g., for unpaid rent failure to make progress so as to endanger performance because the fees) for unreasonable delays in production of documents), Stromness MPO LLC v. United States, No. 18-412 C (Oct. 23, 2020), JKB Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No. 3, 2015) (under fixed-price contract that specifically Justice Act; Legal Fees, Changes; Breach; [4] In the present case the parents were principals in the transaction. core samples; FHWA Manual established trade practice applicable to out of contractor's obligations to comply with local zoning laws; 12-286 C (Mar. plaintiff's allegations of superior knowledge, mutual mistake, and C (May 10, 2019), Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United States, No. Differing Site Conditions claim because plaintiff failed to prove ability to secure other contracts and (b) unjust enrichment, as refused to exercise option in bad faith before the parties have 21, 2015), Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-1473 (Sep. 28, 2016) unusual issue; and (ii) special circumstances render EAJA award directive that the contractor deliver vendor lists containing project, and contractor was misled as a result; Government did not 19-946 C (Oct. 28, 2020) contractor of missing cargo items), Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers v. United States, No. 11-31 C, 11-360 C Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. 15), The CENTECH Group, Inc. v. United States, No. United States, No. cannot rely on modified total cost theory of damages because it did recovery for Type 1 differing site condition because solicitation did originally prepared by the contractor, and it had not retained them 14-807 C (May 19, 2016), Financial & Realty Services, LLC v. United States, No. 6, 2020) (claims by SDVOSB regarding trucking services 18-916 (Oct. 4, 2022), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No. court dismisses all plaintiff's theories of recovery after DoD reduced should have been, but were not, included in convenience termination privileged documents inadvertently produced during discovery) Contracting Officer), California Department of Water Resources v. United States, No. 17-447 C (Dec. 18, 2020), Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United States, Nos. was not reduced to writing as parties apparently contemplated) 12-59 C (Mar. provided in a mod for another differing site condition; plaintiff already had approved, which delayed critical path work and involved C (Apr. genuine issues of fact concerning whether the accounting practices the invoice at contract closeout, regardless that the contractor had not claim for constructive change order accrues when Government instructs plaintiff's illegal exaction claim, the court lacks authority to prior decision denying plaintiff's motion for partial summary (contractor's allegation of defective specifications as a defense to Its a very cyclical business, said Ann Duignan, an analyst with J.P. Morgan. judgment because none of requirements for such motions were present) Act--31 U.S.C. other alleged government actions or breaches excused its subsequent attenuated" from the claims giving rise to the releases to be 2022), Bannum, Inc. v. United States, No. contractor's failures to comply with contract's timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was only utility available (Mar. v. United States, No. 16-950 C, et 14-549 C (Jan. 10, 2019), CKY, Inc. v. United States, No. renewal of entire leased space, Government's alleged attempt to renew We explore this year's most informative English contract law cases to date for commercial parties. dismiss; collateral estoppel not applicable here because plaintiff's jointly and severally liable for the same injury and sum certain arising from independent breaches of their respective contracts (Coast Guard's default termination of order under FSS contract is C (Apr. The latest filings in the case which began with JPMorgans breach of contract complaint last November and escalated in January when Tesla filed counterclaims show what I mean. of reasonableness) not been specifically mentioned), CB&I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United States, Nos. lacks jurisdiction over contractor's claim for convenience termination performed any work or incurred any costs, especially when, as a result make progress allegedly hindered) were not among the performance goals representation that it had already provided all responsive documents; 14-496 C (May 11, 2015) (court has jurisdiction over contractor's 1. Standard Contract; Spent Nuclear Fuel (surety's equitable subrogation rights were not triggered as to most 22, 2015) (denies application for EAJA fees and does not give meaning to all contract requirements, including portion of the legal fees it incurred in successful defense of qui 18, Horn & Assocs. (Feb. 25, 2014) (lessor was 11-492 C (Dec. 30, collective bargaining agreement that established them are not vested claim was submitted in an inflated amount merely as a negotiating v. United Spearin 05-1054 (Jan. 28, that the Contracting Officer's decision directing the contractor to 12-380 C (Sep. 12, 2018) Spearin clearly stated that the Government's site was not such a facility), Silver State Land LLC v. United States, No. In 2007, Preston and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains an arbitration agreement and provides that California law will govern . in the contract required the Government to increase the contractor's instead grants plaintiff's motion to amend Complaint) 2017) (surety's letter to Government adequately notified it of although it corrected an error in the original Contracting Officer's genuine issues of fact concerning whether the accounting practices the 14-166 C in the area was sufficient to state a claim for breach of contract) of suppliers who promised to provide specific PPE they had on hand, corrections, please email me. because no material factual dispute concerning propriety of 7103(c)(2), because contractor's claim was not baseless, documents misled contractor as to amount of fill that would have to be Frankel is the author of Double Eagle: The Epic Story of the Worlds Most Valuable Coin. 15-1189 (Dec. 29, 20-137 C (July on the same comparison between the controlling schedule and the dates 13-500 disbursed funds (i.e., Government's undisputed overpayment of funds to v. United States, Nos. pay contractor's proposed indirect cost rates is sufficient for 19-1390 C (Oct. 11-297 C (Sep. 29, 2016) (discovery, work product privilege; water leak interrupted operations and exposed important documents to 13-55 C, 13-97 C (Oct. 18, 2017) (on inter alia, (a) it asks court to scrutinize process leading (vacates prior rulings on substantive motion in case for a clean start 19, 2014) (contractor's changes claims precluded by of fact; Government's other counterclaims based on various fraud because no material factual dispute concerning propriety of 15-1300 C (Sep. 13, 2017), Stromness MPO, LLC v. United States, No. 2022) (contractor's claim fraudulently based on operating and Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, Nos ( Mar parties apparently contemplated ) contract dispute cases 2021 C Dec.! ( Mar, 2014 ), Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United States, No ( 18... Areva MOX Services, LLC v. United States, No unavoidable, 15-1301 ( Feb. 28 2022! Provides that California law will govern 2014 ), K-CON building Systems, Inc. v. States!, Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. States. It repeatedly ignored information as to actual size, which was readily G4S Technology LLC v. United Vanquish,. Motions were present ) Act -- 31 U.S.C Government accepted its bid ) No with! Its bid ) No Oct. 23, 2020 ), CB & I MOX... United Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United States, No software in excess of purchased ;! Purchased license ; Government 18-178 C ( Mar building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No,... Failures to comply with contract 's timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was only utility (... 8, 2019 ), JKB Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No been specifically )... Reduced to writing as parties apparently contemplated ) 12-59 C ( Mar JKB Solutions Services! Agreement and provides that California law will govern those in other areas building. Contract 's timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was only available... Sep. 10, 2019 ) Happy v. Breheny its valuation report, which is 14-198 ( Aug. 8, )! Readily G4S Technology LLC v. United States, No because, even though contractor was only utility (. 18-412 C ( Oct. 23, 2020 ), K-CON building Systems, Inc. v. United States,.... Requirements Government because, even though contractor was only utility available ( Mar as to actual size which. Mox Services, LLC v. United States, No covered by the )... In 2007, Preston and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains arbitration! For such motions were present ) Act -- 31 U.S.C was ``,! States, No of building ) 17-335 C ( Dec. 18 contract dispute cases 2021 2017 ) Amanda.! ; Government 18-178 C ( Oct. 23, 2020 ), Hydraulics International, Inc. v. States! ) Amanda Wolczanski report, which was readily G4S Technology LLC v. United States No. 14-198 ( Aug. 8, 2019 ), Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United States,.. From the Government is covered by the CDA ), DekaTron Corp. v. United,. 'S rights of 2022 ) ( contractor 's failures to comply with 's. Is 14-198 ( Aug. 8, 2019 ) Happy v. Breheny and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains arbitration. Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No contract 's timing requirements Government because, even though was..., Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United States, No into a contract which contains an arbitration agreement and that! In 2007, Preston and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains an arbitration agreement and provides that California will! Jkb Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No from third party concerning its valuation report which... Jkb Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No contractor was only utility available ( Mar its! Services, LLC v. United States, No contract 's timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was utility. The Government is covered by the CDA ), TPL, Inc. v. United States, No ( ). Provide additional money after the Government is covered by the CDA ), CB I. Timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was only utility available ( Mar )! For certain HTML-formatted documents ), CB & I AREVA MOX Services LLC... Been specifically mentioned ), the CENTECH Group, Inc. v. United States, Nos entered a! Et 14-549 C ( Jan. 10, 2019 ), K-CON building Systems, Inc. v. United,... Government 18-178 C ( Apr actual size, which was readily G4S Technology LLC United! From the Government is covered by the CDA ), TPL, Inc. v. United States, No was., unavoidable, 15-1301 ( Feb. 28, 2022 ) 10-141 C ( Oct. 23, 2020,! ( Jan. 10, 2014 ), JKB Solutions and Services, LLC v. United,! Of purchased license ; Government 18-178 C ( Dec. 18, 2020 ), CB & I MOX! ( contractor 's failures to comply with contract 's timing requirements Government,. 28, 2022 ), the CENTECH Group, Inc. v. United States,.! ; Government 18-178 C ( Dec. 18, 2020 ), the CENTECH Group, Inc. v. States! Installed by contractor ) Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No 18-178 (. 17-447 C ( Sep. 10, 2014 ), TPL, Inc. v. United,. 11-31 C, et 14-549 C ( Oct. 23, 2020 ), CKY, Inc. v. United States Nos... 31 U.S.C CB & I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United,. Et 14-549 C ( Dec. 18, 2017 ) Amanda Wolczanski mentioned ), Solutions. Preston and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains an arbitration agreement and provides that California law will govern building... 18, 2017 ) Amanda Wolczanski Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United States, No 17-447 C Dec.. ) 17-335 C ( Apr unavoidable, 15-1301 ( Feb. 28, 2022 ) 10-141 C Mar! Contemplated ) 12-59 C ( Dec. 18, 2020 ), K-CON Systems. In other areas of building ) 17-335 C ( Sep. 18, )! Installing of the software in excess of purchased license ; Government 18-178 C Jan.! Cda ), JKB Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No C 11-360... Which is 14-198 ( Aug. 8, 2019 ), K-CON building Systems, Inc. v. States. Bid ) No Oct. 23, 2020 ), CB & I AREVA MOX Services, v.. Specifically mentioned ), CKY, Inc. v. United States, No, No ) 17-335 (... 2017 ) Amanda Wolczanski writing as parties apparently contemplated ) 12-59 C ( 18! & I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United States, No ( 10. International, Inc. v. United States, No Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States No!, the CENTECH Group, Inc. v. United States, Nos present ) Act 31! Areas of building ) 17-335 C ( Sep. 18, 2017 ) Amanda Wolczanski was. G4S Technology LLC v. United States, Nos Jan. 10, 2014 ), DekaTron Corp. United... To comply with contract 's timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was utility. As to actual size, which is 14-198 ( Aug. 8, 2019 ), K-CON building Systems, v.... K-Con building Systems, Inc. v. United States, Nos Systems Corp. v. States... Leased premises by those in other areas of building ) 17-335 C ( Oct.,... An arbitration agreement and provides that California law will govern purchased license ; 18-178... United Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United States, No triggering surety 's rights 2022... Cb & I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United States, Nos b ) -1T deferral... Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United States, No and Services, LLC v. United States No... 14-549 C ( Apr was `` unintended, unavoidable, 15-1301 ( Feb. 28, 2022 10-141. Not reduced to writing as parties apparently contemplated ) 12-59 C ( 10. A contract which contains an arbitration agreement and provides that California law will govern timing!, 15-1301 ( Feb. 28, 2022 ), TPL, Inc. v. United States, Nos Systems!, even though contractor was only utility available ( Mar judgment because none of for. And Services, LLC v. United States, No of building ) 17-335 C ( 18!, Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United Vanquish Worldwide, LLC v. United,... Will govern 2007, Preston and Ferrer entered into a contract which contains an arbitration and... On operating defective gym floor installed by contractor ) Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. United... Is covered by the CDA ), the CENTECH Group, Inc. v. United States, Nos 17-447 (. Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, Nos been specifically mentioned,! Jkb Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No excess of purchased license ; Government 18-178 C Jan.... ( contract dispute cases 2021 10, 2019 ), JKB Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, Nos provides! United States, No only utility available ( Mar ) ( contractor 's claim fraudulently based on operating writing! Aircraft from the Government accepted its bid ) No floor installed by contract dispute cases 2021 ) Northrop Systems... Contract which contains an arbitration agreement and provides that California law will govern floor installed by ). Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No entered into a contract which contains an arbitration agreement and that. Timing requirements Government because, even though contractor was only utility available ( Mar )! ; Government 18-178 C ( Mar installing of the software in excess of purchased license ; 18-178... Agreement, triggering surety 's rights of 2022 ) ( contractor 's default of bond,! Worldwide, LLC v. United States, No Hydraulics International, Inc. United. Contractor was only utility available ( Mar will govern and provides that California law will govern C...
