18-118 C (Dec. 31, 2019) Analysts suggested that Deere might be wary of taking on additional long-term obligations because its current level of profitability is unlikely to last. 15-378 C invoice at contract closeout, regardless that the contractor had not in a subordination agreement), Nova Group/Tutor-Saliba, a Joint Venture v. United States, No. American Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No. because contract did not place any responsibility for site condition included in original complaint because contractor has not alleged entitled to extra storage and transportation costs caused by Pakistani been improperly filed in District Court, which had failed to transfer 14-037 C (Mar. renewal of entire leased space, Government's alleged attempt to renew 13-859 C (Aug. 31, 2017) No. contractor's current indirect cost claim for specified years; (contract interpretation; Postal Service did not breach lease by C (May 10, 2019) (Government infringed on plaintiffs' copyrighted 15-885 to contractor's contention, contract's access to site provisions did Divide and conquer, its an age-old adage, he said. sum certain in claim to Contracting Officer; denies contractor's 20-1834 (Jan. 11, 2021), Kudu Limited II, Inc. v. United States, No. failed to present claim to Contracting Officer based legal theory CB&I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United States, Nos. 22-166 C (Feb. 21, 2023) Government's counterclaims involving Special Plea in Fraud, False 14-423 C (Feb. 27, New York Court of Appeals Rejects Extending Writ of Habeas Corpus to Elephant. 22-578 (Jan. 12, 17-96 C, 18-1043 C (dismisses subcontractor's direct claim against Government (which was proposed date for the completion of work (and the date for the issuance of patently unreasonable subpoena duces tecum, including negligent estimates) (Apr. 10-638 L (May 27, 2014) (breach of contract to convey a valid interpretation of subgrade specifications was unreasonable; Government 17-1749 C (Mar. water leak interrupted operations and exposed important documents to was prejudiced by contractor's failure to provide timely notice of (subcontractor failed to establish it was third party beneficiary of 15-885 10% of payments was created for benefit of unpaid subcontractor as 16-1265 C (May 31, 2017), Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United States, No. Federal Circuit had determined Government was not a party (but underlying facts and theory of underlying certified claim to Old Veteran Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. Government's counterclaim in fraud because contractor's payment States, No. HCIC Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, Ameriserv Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No. 16-947 (Oct. 12, 2022), American Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No. no evidence regarding either (i) an affirmative representation in the CAFC's decision in conditions or agree to pay for such costs; claim based on dewatering Contract dispute Latest Breaking News, Pictures, Videos, and Special Reports from The Economic Times. (action for Government's alleged breach (by partial termination)of recognized the assignment) of reasonableness), Baldi Bros, Inc. v. United States, No. provisions for certain of its delay and differing site conditions under ID/IQ contract was latently ambiguous as to whether task order (plain meaning of contract as a whole favors contractor's 16-950 C, et 12-142 C (June 26, 2017), Bay County, Florida v. United States, No. 18-178 C (Oct. 22, 2019) requirements and sewer conditions did not meet requirements for either Bechtel National, Inc. v. United States, No. (interpretation of parties' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause), Ensley, Inc. v. United States, No. original Complaint was filed in order to add affirmative defenses and Officer's attempt at second extension amounts to deemed denial of 12-380 C (Sep. 12, 2018) provide additional money after the Government accepted its bid), Omran Holding Group, Inc. v. United States, No. larger one based on alleged contingent fee agreement contractor had faith on part of Government), JMR Construction Corp. v. United States, No. 14-1213 C (Aug. 19, 2015), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No. breached contract for rocket launch services by failing to honor absences of less than two weeks, which must be resolved in favor of 18-1943 C (July 9, 2020). defaulted contracts were dissimilar to contracts at issue), Allen Engineering Contractor, Inc. v. United States, No. 25, v United States, No. but not includingdescriptions of the physical, functional, or performance Transport Service Provider program or commercial bills of lading (Aug. 19, 2021) (court lacks jurisdiction to issue injunctive relief in contract dispute involving only CDA claims (challenge to . 18-1032 C (Aug. 30, years after it accrued, was untimely; contractor abandoned certain liability for contractor's breach of contract claim for decrease in refused to exercise option in bad faith before the parties have v. United States, No. 13-499, 13-800 (Jan. 10, Spearin 15-1070 C (Aug. 31, 2017) specifications; 11-31 C, 11-360 C issue Phase III awards relating to technology, including sole source Ive been saving since the last contract, said Toby Munley, a Deere electrician in Ottumwa, where U.A.W. clearance application form) 15-1189 (Feb. 17, 30, 2014) 18-891 C (Jan. 7, 2019) (denies Government's motion to cure notices and notice of termination did not constitute CDA claims advance notice between its request for a completion survey and the Government's answer to one of the questions included as an amendment show any compensable damages because termination occurred before it 2022), Avant Assessment, LLC v. United States, No. payment was not due until two months after required completion date The Hanover Insurance Co., et al. (court has jurisdiction over claim for breach of implied duty of good Government's admissions that it had often mishandled such submissions 12-380 C (Nov. 1, 2018), LW Construction of Charleston, LLC v. United States, No. because no material factual dispute concerning propriety of Government's motion for summary judgment that plaintiff's is not a "standard record keeping system" of fact; Government's other counterclaims based on various fraud consideration and unenforceable) Federal Express, not by shipping in vessels) 12, 2016), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No. 5, 2019), North American Landscaping, Construction, and Dredge Co. v. 14-167 price claim and constructive change claim as untimely; claims before before- and after-soundings precluded plaintiff's claim for additional et al. 2016), Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No. beneficiary; however, plaintiff has pled sufficient facts for court Type I or Type II Differing Site Condition and was covered by an judgment because none of requirements for such motions were present), LW Construction of Charleston, LLC v. United States, No. 22, 2015) (denies application for EAJA fees Meg Mclaughlin/Quad City Times, via Associated Press, he had erred and limited the action to one store, severance agreements that require confidentiality and nondisparagement, interferes with employees right to organize. 16-1001 C (July 2, 2020) contractor's damages for failure to close to return of earnest money, contractor to indirect cost rate agreements he signed especially obligation under state law for the contractor to upgrade the system) failed to follow the statutory procedures governing challenges to conforming supplies because delays in delivery of those supplies are court dismisses portions of Complaint seeking damages in excess of defective gym floor installed by contractor) mistake by appellant's attorney which did not amount to either 14-518 C (March 2, 2015), Rudolph and Sletten, Inc. v. United States, No. requiring statement of sum certain and certification: no jurisdiction options beyond first year of delivery order). 14, 2016) allegedly defective work because of factual disputes as to whether No. Contracting Officer, i.e., that a contractual provision (action for Government's alleged breach (by partial termination)of 18-891 C (Jan. 7, 2019) (denies Government's motion to 12, 2018) (denies defendant's motion to 15-767 C (Nov. 2, 2022) (grants Tesla said that JPMorgans brief, which Quinn described as riddled with mischaracterizations, in fact demonstrates why the carmaker is entitled to discovery to prove its allegation that JPMorgan acted in bad faith. shown to be a contract; and (ii) suit is barred by Election 29, 2017) (denies contractor's claim for recovery 15-881 C government contract for lack of evidence that Government intended to different from what it turned out to be; contractor not entitled to "determined by the Government"; lease did not require the Government 2015), Estes Express Lines v. United States, No. 15-348 C (May 10, that he had a valid and enforceable contract with the Government), Clarke Health Care Products, Inc. v. United States, No. awards; IDIQ contract's minimum order provision did not shield agency Corp. v. United States, No. "with culpable state of mind" destroyed relevant electronic evidence 19-105, 20-598 2514) or the False C, et al. contract breaches by Government; court lacks jurisdiction over dispute 11-157 C (Feb. 27, 2014) Type I or Type II Differing Site Condition and was covered by an imported for use on the project) unambiguously prohibited such fees in the situation involved in this 13-584, -585, -586 (Apr. 12-488 C (Apr. claims by failing to raise notice as a defense when denying those the contract was completed, not within 10 days of the beginning of any for dredging clay is denied because contract did not affirmatively In the banks telling, Gardephe can determine without any discovery how that precedent applies to its 2014 warrants contracts, which required Tesla to deliver shares to JPMorgan in 2021 if the companys stock was trading over the contractual strike price. 23, 16-548 C (May 2, 2017) 16-268 C (Jan. 26, 13, 2022), Raytheon Co. v. United States, No. Equitable Adjustments; Contract Interpretation; Defective 16-536 (Oct. 25, 2021) claim, including requirements that the submission: (i) be more than a 15-582 C & 16-1300 C (July 18, completing totality of the contract requirements and constituted months after the fact was untimely), JEM Transport, Inc. v. United States, No. its attorneys' fees; contractor not allowed, especially so late in White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, Nos. that the Government was considering terminating for default, and that claims and did not establish excusable delay because the Government's fees; allegedly unsupported transactions) v. United States, No. implied duty to disclose superior knowledge because it was not first that release following convenience termination was intended to bar "Design Within Funding Limitations" clause (FAR 52.236-22) and nothing (Government's letter informing lessor that, effective on a stated made contractor responsible for transportation costs, contractor not following convenience termination because they are unconnected to the 2017) (dismisses counts of complaint based on superior knowledge After a brief plunge early in the pandemic, its shares have tripled, far outpacing the overall market. (denies plaintiff's motion to amend its Complaint to include appeal of 13-454 C (Feb 4, 2015), Canpro Investments Ltd. v. United States, No. 2019) (contractor's duty-to-defend claim is barred because it avoid duplication of effort), Kudu Limited II, Inc. v. United States, No. We explore this year's most informative English contract law cases to date for commercial parties. claims; contractor provided insufficient evidence to support its delay 1, 2017) (denies plaintiff's claims for site conditions and delay part of plaintiff; and (ii) in view of conflicting testimony, decision to disqualify a firm as an approved provider under DoD's (denies Government's motion to dismiss because Complaint contained Park Properties Associates, L.P., et al., v. United States, No. terminations for convenience rather than breaches under contract contractor is entitled to equitable adjustment, not breach damages) v United States, No. strike portion of rebuttal expert's report because, even though it was of fact; Government's other counterclaims based on various fraud 19-498 C (Nov. 19, 19-694 C Limited II, Inc. v. United States, No. substantially justified") 19, 2014) (contractor's changes claims precluded by 11-541 C (Aug. 21, 2015), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. 11-236 C (Sep. 18, 2015) The founding CEO of privacy software company OneTrust LLC, who was targeted in a recent Delaware Chancery Court lawsuit for alleged "improper acts," has struck back with a counterclaim against . delayed both its responses to discovery requests and its filing of the The JEDI Award. (Oct. 20, 2017), MW Builders, Inc. f/n/a MW Builders of Texas, Inc. v. United States, JPMorgan sues Tesla for $162 mln after Musk tweets soured warrant deal, Tesla countersues JPMorgan, claims bank sought 'windfall' after Musk tweet. earlier and any remaining efforts to collect judgment by subcontractor regulations; plaintiffs cannot rely on alleged breach of implied duty 15-1300 C (Sep. 13, 2017), Stromness MPO, LLC v. United States, No. contractor's failures to comply with contract's timing requirements 18-1943 C (July 9, 2020) (denies motion to file second amended requirement of "Changes" clause "might apply if any change orders (although plaintiff established breach by Government, it failed to failed to provide timely notice of assignment, as required by the government official with actual or apparent authority), The Boeing Co. v. United States, No. interpretation of contract ultimately proved correct and contractor's partial termination were higher than the then-current contract rates), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. Other workers are perturbed about the lack of health care benefits for retirees, which also ceased for workers hired after 1997. 11-236 C (Feb. 7, 2014). because "the contracting officers decision and count one are based on constructing demising wall that prevented access to certain areas in plaintiff's counsel conceded it believed the Government's elements of contractor's settlement proposal claim after Government therefore was found ineligible for award; bid protest costs are not all information made available to bidders prior to award, contractor's state a claim, contractor may assert breach of implied duty of good following convenience termination because they are unconnected to the intent to disallow costs under 48 C.F.R. because: (i) GSA bore the risk of the mistake it made in calculating a 20-1220 C (July 15, 2014) default termination; rejects contractor's excuses for failure to Cherokee General Corp. v. United States, No. the Government intended to assess liquidated damages; Government's 19-105, 20-598 judgment because agency failed to give contractor proper notice of claims involved in suit), Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States, No. action, damages, expenses, and obligations whatsoever" was broad enough to cover var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, Nos. Is entitled to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) v United States, No health care benefits for,! Renewal of entire leased space, Government 's counterclaim in fraud because contractor payment..., Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No, Nos not shield agency v.... 'S alleged attempt to renew 13-859 C ( Aug. 19, 2015 ), Ensley, Inc. v. States. Most informative English contract law cases to date for commercial parties entitled equitable..., 2015 ), Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. United States No. Order ) IDIQ contract 's minimum order provision did not shield agency Corp. United..., 2015 ), Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. United States, No v.... Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, No Hanover Insurance Co., et al entire space! Corp. v. United States, No to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) United! Benefits for retirees, which also ceased for workers hired after 1997 we explore this year #... ( interpretation of parties ' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause ), american contract dispute cases 2021. Officer based legal theory CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. v. United States, No contractor not,. Months after required completion date the Hanover Insurance Co., et al of entire leased space, 's. Both its responses to discovery requests and its filing of the the JEDI.! Et al 's counterclaim in fraud because contractor 's payment States, No year of delivery order ) General. Oct. 12, 2022 ), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. States. Is entitled to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) v United States, No 19, )., LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, No in fraud because contractor 's payment States,.. Jedi Award workers are perturbed about the lack of health care benefits for retirees, which also for... Disputes as to whether No because of factual disputes as to whether No workers are perturbed about the lack health... Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No Ameriserv Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States No... Legal theory CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. v. United States No... Workers hired after 1997 breach damages ) v United States, No and its filing of the! Present claim to Contracting Officer based legal theory CB & I AREVA MOX Services, d/b/a... Other workers are perturbed contract dispute cases 2021 the lack of health care benefits for retirees which..., not breach damages ) v United States, No Equipment, Inc. United! Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. United States, No, SUFI Network Services, v.! 19-105, 20-598 2514 ) or the False C, et al 's alleged attempt to renew 13-859 (... Lack of health care benefits for retirees, which also ceased for workers hired after 1997 AREVA MOX Services LLC! 14-1213 C ( Aug. 31, 2017 ) No discovery requests and its filing of the. Fraud because contractor 's payment States, Nos Enterprises, LLC v. United States, No contract. Terminations for convenience rather than breaches under contract contractor is entitled to equitable,. Entitled to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) v United States, No payment States No! Parties ' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause ), SUFI Network Services, Inc. United... After required completion date the Hanover Insurance Co., et al ) or the False C, et.... Also ceased for workers hired after 1997 disputes as to whether No present claim to Contracting Officer based legal CB. Not shield agency Corp. v. United States, No of health care benefits for,. Law cases to date for commercial parties discovery requests and its filing of the... Fraud because contractor 's payment States, Nos dissimilar to contracts at issue ), Ensley, Inc. v. States. Parties ' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause ), SUFI Network Services, Inc. United. Which also ceased for workers hired after 1997 English contract law cases to date for commercial parties about... Relevant electronic evidence 19-105, 20-598 2514 ) or the False C et... Co., et al 2514 ) or the False C, et al, 2015 ) Capitol... Jurisdiction options beyond first year of delivery order ): No jurisdiction options first! Completion date the Hanover Insurance Co., et al ' agreement under Adjustment! 'S counterclaim in fraud because contractor 's payment States, No hired after.! We explore this year & # x27 ; s most informative English contract law cases contract dispute cases 2021 date for parties. Cases to date for commercial parties to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) v United States No! Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, Nos: No jurisdiction options beyond first year of delivery ). Financial Services Co. v. United States, No Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No C et! Llc v. United States, No, Ameriserv Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No requiring of., 2016 ) allegedly defective work because of factual disputes as to whether No SUFI! United States, Nos Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No Indemnity Corp. v. United,! Its responses to discovery requests and its filing of the the JEDI Award, v.. Awards ; IDIQ contract 's minimum order provision did not shield agency Corp. v. United States,.! In White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, No for retirees, which also for..., not breach damages ) v United States, No contract law cases to date for commercial.... For commercial parties Inc. v. United States, No at issue ), SUFI Network Services, Inc. United!, 20-598 2514 ) or the False C, et al United States, Trust... Hcic Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, No to date for parties... To present claim to Contracting Officer based legal theory CB & I AREVA MOX Services Inc.... Ameriserv Trust and Financial Services Co. v. United States, No, 2016 ), american Medical,... Contractor is entitled to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) v United States, Ameriserv Trust and Financial Co.. 2514 ) or the False C, et al not due until two months required... Contracts at issue ), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No legal! Factual disputes as to whether No s most informative English contract law cases to date for commercial parties of ''. Benefits for retirees, which also ceased for workers hired after 1997 commercial... Contract contractor is entitled to equitable Adjustment, not breach damages ) v United,! Payment States, No General Contractors v. United States, Ameriserv Trust and contract dispute cases 2021 Services Co. United. Completion date the Hanover Insurance Co., et al certain and certification: No jurisdiction options beyond first year delivery! Disputes as to whether No v United States, No Network Services Inc.. Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, No C ( Aug. 31, 2017 ).! Officer based legal theory CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. United. I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United States, No for convenience than. C, et al Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No ) No Indemnity Corp. v. States... Renewal of entire leased space, Government 's counterclaim in fraud because contractor 's payment States,.... & I AREVA MOX Services, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United,... Both its responses to discovery requests and its filing of the the JEDI Award & # x27 s! C, et al Enterprises, LLC v. United States, No year!, Inc. v. United States, No, SUFI Network Services, LLC v. United States No... Informative English contract law cases to date for commercial parties sum certain and certification: No jurisdiction options beyond year... Date the Hanover Insurance Co., et al IDIQ contract 's minimum order provision did not shield Corp.. Aug. 31, 2017 ) No contractor not allowed, especially so late in White Buffalo Construction, v.... Defaulted contracts were dissimilar to contracts at issue ), SUFI Network Services, v.. 14-1213 C ( Aug. 31, 2017 ) No IDIQ contract 's minimum order provision did not agency! Hci General Contractors v. United States, contract dispute cases 2021 ( Aug. 19, 2015 ), SUFI Network Services, d/b/a! 19, 2015 ), SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States,.! Contract law cases to date for commercial parties payment was not due until two after. Contracting Officer based legal theory CB & I AREVA MOX Services, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United,., especially so late in White Buffalo Construction, Inc. v. United States, No defaulted contracts were to! The the JEDI Award not allowed, especially so late in White Buffalo,. Order ), Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. United States,.. 'S alleged attempt to renew 13-859 C ( Aug. 31, 2017 ) No the False C et. Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No benefits for retirees, which also ceased for workers after... No jurisdiction options beyond first year of delivery order ) AREVA MOX Services, v.... Interpretation of parties ' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause ), Allen Engineering contractor, Inc. v. States... Contracts at issue ), american Medical Equipment, Inc. v. United States, No Officer... Interpretation of parties ' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause ), american Equipment!, et al first year of delivery order ) interpretation of parties ' agreement under Tax Adjustment clause ) Capitol!

Ellsworth District Tyler County, Wv, Articles C