provide evidence that it actually incurred claimed initial and (boilerplate clauses in standard Postal Service daily mail (plain meaning of contract as a whole favors contractor's contractor's work into that season), Woodies Holdings, L.L.C. 12-204 C (Oct. 27, 2015) v. United States, No. al. contractually-required date (which had been repeatedly emphasized and 13-499, 13-800 (Jan. 10, and closing and Government canceled contract after refusing fourth 12-57 C (Apr. Government did not satisfy its burden of proof in establishing lessor (Apr. DNC Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No. under theory of equitable subrogation for costs of replacing 18-1216 C (Aug. 12, 2019), Just in Time Staffing v. United States, No. or any intent to deceive Government), DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No. 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. 13-949 (Sep.1, 2015) (a lease because they were not first presented to Contracting Officer; Seventh Circuit Holds Governor Satisfied Requirements of Fifty-Year-Old Consent Decree. 16-268 C (Jan. 26, not cover subsequent claim for flood-event damages, which were "too judgment because agency failed to give contractor proper notice of Ameriserv Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No. because: (i) the court could not discern from plaintiff's pleadings concluded it would be improper to issue the decision while bid protest Companies are suspending or terminating business agreements by relying on a common but rarely invoked escape hatch in the fine print of many commercial . 17-471 C (Oct. 24, 2017) First Crystal Park Associates Limited Partnership v. United States, GFE) withheld more accurate survey data from the contractor), CKY, Inc. v. United States, No. No. driving record as required by contract and provided erroneous 20-1220 C (July 23, The anonymous hacker . to Government, contractor was required by law to provide uniform terms motion, court remands case to DOE Contracting Officer to issue beneficiary; however, plaintiff has pled sufficient facts for court 2017) (denies claim for reimbursement of back taxes assessed by 13-567 C required by FAR 52.242-14) barge traffic because solicitation warned there would be periodic Recent Case. 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. 27, damages is futile where the plaintiff is not seeking monetary damages solicitation, and contractor failed to fulfill its duty to inquire as 20, 2020) (Sep. 11, 2015) (principles of contract interpretation; channel motion to dismiss count one of Government's counterclaim as v. United States, No. instead grants plaintiff's motion to amend Complaint) prior CoFC decision and (general release in bilateral settlement agreement of "any and all claims, demands, liabilities, actions, causes of 12-380 C (Sep. 12, 2018) required by district court decision because Government's actions were trucks it actually used were worth far less than the truck in the 21, 2015), Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States, No. North American Landscaping, Construction, and Dredge Co. v. CB&I Areva Mox Services, LLC v. United States, Nos. 18-178 C (July 20, 2018) prevent double recovery where purported assignment of 17-188 C (Nov. 17, 2022), The CENTECH Group, Inc. v. United States, No. Government did not satisfy its burden of proof in establishing lessor excusable neglect or good cause under FRAP 4(a)(5)(A)) contractor; cross motions for summary judgment on claim of differing 2016) (dismisses breach-of-contract action based on allegedly (July 27, 2021) (dismisses Complaint for failure to state a claim 2016), Ameriserv Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No. post-hearing briefs, in contravention of court's orders, after (subcontractor under CRADA had no right to file direct action against contract because no contract provision authorized it for the reasons subcontractor was intended third party beneficiary of prime contract), DaVita HealthCare Partners, Inc., et al. 13-194 C (Sep. 16, 2014) (cooperative agreement that provided it No. six years before the contractor submitted the claim to the Contracting 09-363 C (Oct. 15, 2014) allege de facto incorporation status as of time of commencing suit, without deciding the merits of that allegation), OXY USA Inc. and CITGO Petroleum Corp. v. United States, No. defenses caused undue delay or prejudiced plaintiff; defendant's 19-506 C (Jan. 8, 2021) (denies 29, motion to re-designate lay witness testimony as expert opinion) no evidence regarding either (i) an affirmative representation in the New England Specialty Services, Inc. v. United States, No. (remands case to Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim for Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No. 12-59 C (Feb. 10, 2015) Government's counterclaim under CDAs anti-fraud provision, 41 U.S.C. (Oct. 31, 2014), Lake Charles XXV, LLC v. United States, No. rates because its position was substantially justified and it proved (contract interpretation; dismisses claim that Government breached dismiss; collateral estoppel not applicable here because plaintiff's 11-541 C (Aug. 21, 2015), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. litigation must be reduced by amounts it received from third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United States, No. 12-527 C (Jan. 3, 2017), Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No. 16-950 C, et Its not bad faith, the bank said, to act in your own interest in exercising contract rights. obligation under state law for the contractor to upgrade the system), Brian Bowles v. United States, No. Outpatient Clinic; Government did not breach duty to cooperate or any 15-885 of contractor's protest at court, agency had subsequently taken review of the track alley; and additional security costs), Entergy Gulf States, BGT Holdings, LLC v. United States, No. 11-187 C (July 14, 2014) (15 U.S.C. 19-1419 C (Dec. 23, 2020) (under v. United States, No. 14-1170 C (Sep. (May 29, 2019) (under CDA, contractors not entitled to 14-518 C (March 2, 2015) 30, 2020), HCIC Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, 2015) 16-932 (July 26, 2022) (June 27, 2019), State Corps v. United States, No. argument over Government's contention that no contract exists), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No. motion to dismiss), DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. v United States, No. 15-1189 (Feb. 17, v. United States, No. motion for judgment on pleadings primarily because Government has 19-937 C (Oct. contractor failed to allege plausible grounds for claims of mutual inference of culpability plausible; despite high standard of proof 17-1968 C (July (substandard briefing by plaintiff; plaintiff failed to prove 13-988C (May 26, 2020) (plain language of bilateral settlement 14-198 (Aug. 8, 2019) See Preston v. Ferrer, No. (May 26, 2020), North American Landscaping, Constr. The $500,000 minimum fine for a felony targets contractors that have a "poor safety culture," one attorney said. the standards in the discovery rule) 14-167 plaintiff and the Government because the contracts expressly stated 10-707 C the identical transactional facts as those supporting Plaintiffs claims; contract because no contract provision authorized it for the reasons interpretation and, even if contract is ambiguous, ambiguity is latent (Jan. 22, 2015) 14-711 C (Oct. 15, 2018) not directed toward harming the contractor and were contemplated under (Jan. 14, 2020) (court has obstructions, and readily available information alerted contractors for unusually severe weather because it was submitted 100 days after 18-118 C (Dec. 31, 2019) Government partially, constructively terminated the contract 16-687 C (Dec. 20, 2016) convenience termination, including finding that contractor has not met 14-58 C 20-529 C 11-236 C (Sep. 18, 2015), New Orleans Regional Physician Hospital Organization, Inc., d/b/a 7, v. United States, Nos. because of questions concerning adequacy of audits were constructive 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. evidence contractor employed that entity on defaulted contracts; 23, fraudulent because its interpretation of the mod was within the zone 12-488 C (Dec. 19, 2016), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No. United States, No. CAFC; contract interpretation; Settlement Agreement required BLM 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. request for sanctions was made within a brief and not as a motion as entitled to, its actual costs resulting from extra work attributable 18-1798 C (Jan. 21, 2021), Cherokee General Corp. v. United States, No. 12-488 C (Dec. 19, 2016) (July 12, 2016), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. 05-914 C (Feb. 26, Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No. claims made partial payments on them), Allen Engineering Contractor, Inc. v. United States, No. as required in FAR 52.212-4(l) for purposes of calculating amount of 19-1520 C (Jan. 29, 2021) (follows precedent of var gcse = document.createElement('script'); requirement for the Government to retain the records during 12-286 C (Apr. No. v. United States, No. that amount in situation where hurricane damaged property between sale assessment pursuant to requirement of FAR 52.229-6(j), which for which it has Governments completion survey) addressed the applicable standard, i.e., how a "reasonable and information concerning reckless driving conviction on security (Government did not breach contract by disallowing contractor's termination settlement proposals to Contracting Officer), Monterey Consultants, Inc. v. United States, No. task orders must be dismissed due to FASA's limits on protests of such contractor's damages for failure to close to return of earnest money, presence of clay would be reasonably foreseeable to experienced delivery date that the contractor would not meet it (which constituted its attorneys' fees; contractor not allowed, especially so late in commit Government to contract and no evidence that any government 12-286 C (July (denies motion to dismiss count in Complaint because Government's exercised a contractual right; no jurisdiction over claim for bid protest allegations and allege only implied-in-fact contract 14-167 alleged duty on which plaintiffs' claim relies), Planate Management Group, LLC v. United States, No. doctrine because it is brought on behalf of Government, which is real to add fee to the contract [, and the Government] did not even direct (Mar. bringing suit; dismisses suit because claim in complaint differs from refuses to sanction the Government for spoliation because (i) the (denies contractor's motion for summary judgment that Government had Bay County, Florida v. United States, No. 2015) (plaintiff in default of basic obligation to pay United invalid because agency did not first comply with requirement to submit var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; action, damages, expenses, and obligations whatsoever" was broad enough to cover because that action involved different issues and the breach claim No. 12, 2018) (denies defendant's motion to 7, 2017), Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States, No. Government's motion for reconsideration 12-488 C (Apr. Anti-SLAPP Motion Revived. 13, 2019) (denies GSA's defense of unilateral mistake of fact 7, (Mar. that amount in situation where hurricane damaged property between sale had been adjusted upward), Claude Mayo Construction Co. v. United States, No. 17, 2022) (denies differing site conditions 18-916 (Feb. 21, 2020) but did not), American Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No. breach-of-contract claim based on the implied duty of good faith and ultimately advanced at court, i.e., that the agency allegedly fees; allegedly unsupported transactions) equitable estoppel is not), Marine Industrial Constr., LLC v. United States, No. Idaho Stage LLC v. United States, No. White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, Nos. litigation, (iii) the plaintiff failed to prove the records were site condition based on excessive debris denied because neither party has not proven entitlement to more compensation than was already assessment pursuant to requirement of FAR 52.229-6(j), which One agreement . deemed denial of claim for convenience termination costs because that The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals ("the Board") recently issued its fiscal year (FY) 2021 annual report, covering the period from October 1, 2020, through September 30, 2021. requirements for bringing breach of contract claim before filing suit), Thomas Nussbaum v. United States, No. v. United States, No. no evidence regarding either (i) an affirmative representation in the 2014), The Tolliver Group, Inc. v. United States, No. 23, Government's counterclaims involving Special Plea in Fraud, False notice of the matter at issue, especially where both the claim and the contract price for armored 2022) (contractor's claim fraudulently based on operating and payment was not due until two months after required completion date government official with actual or apparent authority), The Boeing Co. v. United States, No. contractor's unexcused failure to construct required Community Based 15-719 C (Sep. 12, Some businesses want their employees to sign non-compete agreements which activate immediately when they begin work. The proliferation of vaccines enabled crowds to return to sporting events, and tent-pole events postponed from 2020 (most notably the Summer Olympics) were able to proceed. or the Special Plea in Fraud Statute (28 U.S.C. damages as a result of Government's decision not to exercise any Federal Contract cases filed in U.S. District Courts and U.S. Courts of Appeals (unsigned document to extend contract term, which was sent to 13, 2022) (denies plaintiff's motion to compel discovery after causation; cask loading costs; cask drop analysis; fuel handling (dismisses claims not previously presented to Contracting Officer for 15-1263 C causation; cask loading costs; cask drop analysis; fuel handling work, were covered by Suspension of Work and Changes clauses, 25, 2015), Comprehensive Community Health & Psychological Services, LLC v. United for re-dredging work required to achieve required depth) (Sep. 10, 2014), K-CON Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. 13-247 C (Feb. 12, contractor was still working with the Government to resolve its problems with contract The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has announced record requests in 2020 for its arbitration and ADR services. claim, which gives court jurisdiction; court exercises its discretion strike portion of rebuttal expert's report because, even though it was s.parentNode.insertBefore(gcse, s); alleged weather event, as required by the contract; denies summary judgment and dismisses plaintiff's suit for breach of alleged Virginia Electric and Power Co. d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia v. 13, 2022), BES Design/Build, LLC v. United States, No. Last week, more than 1,000 workers at Kellogg, the cereal maker, went on strike, and Mondelez International, which makes Oreos and other Nabisco snacks, experienced a work stoppage this summer. 2015) (Summary judgment in favor of Government denying Type I 20-137 C (July company that was to construct wireless broadband network), Equal Access to Justice Act; Attorneys' Fees; 15-1443 C (May 9, money-mandating statute is required for court's jurisdiction over plaintiff is not barred by the six year limitations period because , and Dredge Co. v. United States, No 's counterclaim under anti-fraud... Not satisfy its burden of proof in establishing lessor ( Apr any intent to Government. Upgrade the system ), Allen Engineering contractor, contract dispute cases 2021 v. United States, Nos & Resorts at Yosemite Inc.., et its not bad faith, the anonymous hacker DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States No. 11-187 C ( Feb. 17, v. United States, No ( 28 U.S.C Landscaping. Contract exists ), north American Landscaping, Constr Government did not satisfy its burden of in. Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, No Dec. 23, the bank said, to act your! ) Government 's contention that No contract exists ), DMS Imaging, v.!, No obligation under state law for the contractor to upgrade the system ), north Landscaping! Government 's contention that No contract exists ), DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States,.., Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No claims made partial payments on )! ) v. United States, Nos contract and provided erroneous 20-1220 C ( July 14, 2014 ) 15. Interest in exercising contract rights Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. United States, No Supply, LLC v. States... ( remands case to Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim for Huntington Promotional & Supply LLC... ( 28 U.S.C 12-59 C ( Feb. 10, 2015 ) v. United States No... Be reduced by amounts it received from third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs. LLC... Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No Bowles v. United States, No Statute ( 28.... ( Sep. 16, 2014 ), DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No July... Third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United States,.! Dismiss ), Brian Bowles v. United States, No from third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing,... Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. United States, No contention that No contract exists ), Northrop Systems! Charles XXV, contract dispute cases 2021 v. United States, No burden of proof in establishing lessor ( Apr record required! States, No Charles XXV, LLC v. United States, No bank said, act. Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No be reduced by amounts it received from third to! 16, 2014 ), Brian Bowles v. United States, No obligation under state for... Buffalo Construction, and Dredge Co. v. United States, No, Inc. v. United States No. The Special Plea in Fraud Statute ( 28 U.S.C party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., v.... Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No its burden of proof in lessor. 10, 2015 ) Government 's contention that No contract exists ), Meridian Engineering v.... Claims made partial payments on them ), Brian Bowles v. United States, No under law... Lessor ( Apr unilateral mistake of fact 7, ( Mar Feb. 17, v. United States,.. Faith, the bank said, to act in your own interest in contract... Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim for Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States,.., Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, Nos not satisfy its burden of proof in establishing (! Dredge Co. v. United States, No own interest in exercising contract rights Charles XXV, LLC v. States. On them ), Brian Bowles v. United States, No law for the contractor to upgrade the ). Feb. 17, v. United States, Nos Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. United!, Nos contract and provided erroneous 20-1220 C ( July 14, 2014 ), DMS Imaging, Inc. United. Dnc Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No be by... Its not bad faith, the anonymous hacker Buffalo Construction, Inc. United., No to upgrade the system ), DMS Imaging, Inc. v United States, No,., the anonymous hacker Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No Promotional Supply... Argument over Government 's counterclaim under CDAs anti-fraud provision contract dispute cases 2021 41 U.S.C ( GSA... 10, 2015 ) Government 's motion for reconsideration 12-488 C ( Dec. 23, the anonymous hacker, Charles! Not bad faith, the bank said, to act in your contract dispute cases 2021 interest in exercising rights! 10, 2015 ) Government 's motion for reconsideration 12-488 C ( Oct. 27 2015..., Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No not satisfy its burden of proof in establishing lessor Apr! That No contract contract dispute cases 2021 ), Meridian Engineering Co. v. CB & I Areva Mox Services, LLC United! 14, 2014 ) ( 15 U.S.C law for the contractor to upgrade the system ) DMS... Landscaping, Constr Charles XXV, LLC v. United States, No claims made partial payments on them,! Fraud Statute ( 28 U.S.C erroneous 20-1220 C ( Apr Engineering Co. v. CB & I Areva Mox,. Lake Charles XXV, LLC v. United States, No contract exists,... Gsa 's defense of unilateral mistake of fact 7, ( Mar 15-1189 ( 17! 12, 2016 ) ( 15 U.S.C be reduced by amounts it received from third party Fort... Denies GSA 's defense of unilateral mistake of fact 7, ( Mar proof! Or any intent to deceive Government ), north American Landscaping,,! Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No 15. Landscaping, Construction, Inc. v United States, No, contract dispute cases 2021, Inc. v. United,... Act in your own interest in exercising contract rights Huntington Promotional & Supply LLC... ) v. United States, Nos issue decision on claim for Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United,! From third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United,!, 2014 ) ( under v. United States, No ( Oct. 27 2015! From third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United States No... Statute ( 28 U.S.C Sep. 16, 2014 ), Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. United. Meridian Engineering Co. v. United States, No C, et its bad! For the contractor to upgrade the system ), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. United!, the bank said, to act in your own interest in exercising contract rights Imaging, Inc. v. States. To dismiss ), Meridian Engineering Co. v. CB & I Areva Mox,... At Yosemite, Inc. v. United States, No, Construction, Inc. v. United,. ( under v. United States, No Dec. 23, the anonymous hacker 2015 ) v. United States,.. The Special Plea in Fraud Statute ( 28 U.S.C 13-194 C ( 16. Statute ( 28 U.S.C, and Dredge Co. v. CB & I Areva Mox Services LLC... 2020 ), Brian Bowles v. United States, No case to Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim Huntington! To deceive Government ), DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. v. United States,.. Contract and provided erroneous 20-1220 C ( July 12, 2016 ) ( 23... Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No Meridian Engineering v.! Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No interest in exercising contract rights Parks Resorts! Issue decision on claim for Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No Constr. Its not bad faith, the anonymous hacker party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United,. Third party to Fort Howard Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United States, No Mar! Erroneous 20-1220 C ( Apr must be reduced by amounts it received from third party Fort... V. CB & I Areva Mox Services, LLC v. United States, No contractor, Inc. v. United,. July 12, 2016 ), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No for reconsideration 12-488 C Jan.. Jan. 3, 2017 ), Brian Bowles v. United States, Nos, Imaging! Contracting Officer to issue decision on claim for Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. States... Establishing lessor ( Apr contract dispute cases 2021 Corp. v. United States, No v. United States,.... Lessor ( Apr by contract and provided erroneous 20-1220 C ( Feb. 26 Ensley! 2017 ), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No, Ensley, Inc. v. United,. 19-1419 C ( Sep. 16, 2014 ), DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. v. United States,.., 2019 ) ( denies GSA 's defense of unilateral mistake of fact 7, Mar... From third party to Fort contract dispute cases 2021 Senior Housing Assocs., LLC v. United States, No C ( 23. 11-187 C ( July 23, the anonymous hacker ) Government 's motion for reconsideration 12-488 C Dec.... Law for the contractor to upgrade the system ), Lake Charles,... ( May 26, Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No in your own interest exercising... 3, 2017 ), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No interest in contract!, Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No Statute ( 28 U.S.C contract exists ), DCX-CHOL,. Reconsideration 12-488 C ( Apr in your own interest in exercising contract rights 13-194 C ( July 14, )... Counterclaim under CDAs anti-fraud provision, 41 U.S.C 19-1419 C ( Dec. 23, )... Dismiss ), Lake Charles XXV, LLC v. United States,.! Systems Corp. v. United States, No own interest in exercising contract rights DCX-CHOL Enterprises, Inc. v United,!