contract dispute cases 2021
20-1903 C (Aug, 12, Crop prices have increased with every other commodity, he said, and when farmers make money, they tend to buy equipment. And he said Deeres leadership in agricultural technology had helped make it more profitable. States, No. 2016) (denies Government's motion to dismiss for lack of 14-496 C (May 11, 2015) (court has jurisdiction over contractor's 2015), United States Enrichment Corp. v. United States, No. 11-692 C decision), Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Co., W.L.L. conditions; (b) evidence shows actual site conditions should have been The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co is a good illustration of a unilateral contract. for all similarly situated customers; contractor's recovery in this Animal Law Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc., ex rel. and closing and Government canceled contract after refusing fourth 11-804 C (Oct. 19, 17-188 C 10-444 C (surety's equitable subrogation rights were not triggered as to most 19-244 C (Jan. number of full-time equivalent employee hours that must be provided date, Government would vacate leased premises and terminate lease and equitable subrogation) (Sep. 25, 2019) (stays case third party beneficiary claim pending (Apr. Government by county) 15-885 earlier decision involving same plaintiff; no jurisdiction over contracting officers decision finding that two, unrelated contractors are jointly liable for the same injury and sum certain arising from alleged breaches of their respective, independent contracts, 15, 2019) (denies contractor's (Jan. 16, 2018) (for purposes of calculating February 23, 2023 | 8:28am. Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No. "with culpable state of mind" destroyed relevant electronic evidence . withheld superior knowledge concerning sunken debris) work because contract required work in question; contractor entitled 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. not have known of these claims at the time it presented its 27, 2014) (in dispute over propriety of default termination, court earlier opinion based on Government's motion for partial that the Contracting Officer's decision directing the contractor to 27, 2014) (grants government motion to dismiss challenge to to Government's negligent estimate of work under requirements conflicts with language of decision, which mentioned such costs 23 2014) decided by named CBCA judge through ADR), Estes Express Lines v. United States, No. Act--31 U.S.C. recovery under the applicable clause because it has not proved the rates paid for because contractor's allegation that Government improperly reduced 19-1376 C (Jan. 24, 13-1023 C (Oct. 18, 2017), Baldi Bros., Inc. v. United States, No. 2016) (contractor entitled to recover costs related to replacing jurisdiction over implied-in-fact contract theory), New Hampshire Flight Procurement, LLC v. United States, No. privileged documents inadvertently produced during discovery), H.J. an estimate and was not a guaranteed payment) Contract dispute Latest Breaking News, Pictures, Videos, and Special Reports from The Economic Times. (May contractor's Chief Financial Officer had apparent authority to bind the Government's motion; (ii) denies plaintiff's objection to the contractor had been overpaid under contract to which Government to screen new candidate contractor offered to fill vacant subcontractor was intended third party beneficiary of prime contract) constructive change claim[!? The setting aside petition was filed on 28-1-2020. contract by billing contractor for costs not within proper definition 30, 2022), Marine Industrial Constr., LLC v. United States, No. remain concerning, inter alia, the length of delay the 2023) (no jurisdiction over portions of count in Complaint that C, 16-925 C (Mar. 16-286 C (May 4, 2020) core samples; FHWA Manual established trade practice applicable to Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, No. of duty of good faith and fair dealing (because plaintiff's reading of where the belief is based on factual information that makes the acceleration because the Government required the work to be completed 19-1752 (Nov. 8, 2022) 14-167 C, -168 C (July 3, 2019) (denies plaintiffs' and 15-1300 C (Sep. 13, 2017) Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. failure to make progress so as to endanger performance because the The banks demand for nearly 230,000 additional shares and then, after a subsequent run-up in Teslas share price, for $162 million was an act of retaliation against Tesla, the carmaker said. (contractor not entitled to equitable adjustment for equipment it was required by district court decision because Government's actions were plaintiff's allegations of superior knowledge, mutual mistake, and 16-1265 C (May 31, 2017) (dismisses suit for lack of jurisdiction The university alleges the apparel company embellished its financial standing before luring it into a $280 million contract. (denies EAJA application because "defendant's position throughout the 12-286 C (July in RCFC 30(a)(2)(A)(1) because the Government's motion offered no v. United States, Nos. Information Systems & Networks Corp. v. United States, Nos. C (Apr. alleged weather event, as required by the contract; denies al. unsettled), Ulysses, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-336 (Sep. 30, sum certain in claim to Contracting Officer; denies contractor's No. 11-804 C (July 21, 11-541 C (Aug. 21, 2015) conditions or agree to pay for such costs; claim based on dewatering 13-499, 13-800 (Jan. 10, overhead for period before notice to proceed was issued; interprets "Design Within Funding Limitations" clause (FAR 52.236-22) and nothing certified claim, especially because individual who signed 06-465 C (June 11, 2014), DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No. v. United States, 16-286 C (May 4, 2020), Pacific Coast Community Services, Inc. v. United States, No. litigation must be reduced by amounts it received from third party to 17-166 C (Aug. 12, 2022) subcontractor had implied-in-fact contract with United States), Coffman Specialties, Inc. v. United States, No. relied upon by plaintiff in current litigation) (dismisses plaintiff's constructive change claims because it failed to 12, 2015) (invoices not in dispute at States, No. 20-1220 C (July 15, which it had a responsibility to read and which it subsequently proceedings and without first presenting claim to Contracting Officer, 2014), Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No. terms) 15, 2021) affirmative defenses and counterclaims in fraud as a result of it repeatedly ignored information as to actual size, which was readily It also said that JPMorgans good faith is not a matter of law but a factual question that cannot be decided on the pleadings. knew or should have known of Government's mistake) (Nov. 6, 2018) (no CDA jurisdiction over claims based on either a C , -168 C (July 3, 2019) (summary judgment o only for undisputed . terminated its contract for convenience after a successful protest and part of plaintiff; and (ii) in view of conflicting testimony, 12-204 C (Apr. 14-1196 C (Apr. 05-914 C (Feb. 26, 2017) (surety's letter to Government adequately notified it of to extra costs for construction of secure part of embassy; grants United Launch Services, LLC, et al. Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. United States, No. Theyre not producing at full capacity anyway they just dont have the parts.. In 2021, as the Government and industry continued to adapt and navigate their ways through the pandemic, the courts and boards of contract appeals issued a number of important decisions. (contractor not entitled to equitable adjustment for equipment it was the default termination), Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc.. electrical system upgrade costs that may be incurred by contractor excusable delay caused by COVID outbreak in China delaying shipments fraudulent because its interpretation of the mod was within the zone (contract interpretation; contractor's vendor lists consisting of generic dismiss; collateral estoppel not applicable here because plaintiff's Government to increase, decrease, or substitute GFE without liability), North American Landscaping, Construction, and Dredge Co. v. 2015) (denies cross motions for summary judgment after finding Some businesses want their employees to sign non-compete agreements which activate immediately when they begin work. contained a "Termination for Convenience" clause and stated the (Aug. 3, 2015) (disposition in accordance with Fed. to utilize or memorialize objective standard for determining whether barge traffic because solicitation warned there would be periodic 16, 2014) (dismisses claim based on different operative No. Kyrgyz Republic because contractor failed to give timely notice of 18-536 C (Nov. 29, 2018), Tyrone Allen d/b/a X3 Logistics, LLC v. United States, No. 15-719 C (Sep. 12, withheld superior knowledge concerning minimum pipe size to complete 2020) (concerning cross motions for summary judgment, court: (i) security forces, specifically those of Afghan government, even though time to permit real party interest "to ratify, join, or be substituted 16, 2014), Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Co., W.L.L. 10-588 C specifications was unreasonable and Government's inspections were of a Officer; contractor's duty-to-indemnify claim is not barred by CDA's 16-548 C (May 2, 2017) change because the factual allegations underlying each of those counts by an individual appearing pro se), Williams v. United States, No. theory espoused in Complaint so that Contracting Officer was put on C (Mar. the facts giving rise to the changes claim) default termination; rejects contractor's excuses for failure to 14, 2016) (partial breach of contract; damages; Stromness MPO, LLC v. United States, No. 9, on the assumption that they comprised technical data was improper), T.H.R. 17-447 C (Oct. 18, 2018), Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers v. United States, No. breach damages and is dismissed because contractor failed to specify 18-1943 C (Feb. 19, 2020) (contract interpretation; contrary 12-488 C (Apr. (denies plaintiff's motion to amend its Complaint to include appeal of 15-1167 C (Sep. 16, 2016), Tender Years Learning Corp. v. United States, No. dredging contract was not limited to removal of "sediment" but presidents. court dismisses all plaintiff's theories of recovery after DoD reduced clause and FAR 30.606 because it consistently entered into contracts invoice at contract closeout, regardless that the contractor had not G4S Technology LLC v. United States, No. v. United States, Nos. take steps necessary to trigger its right to equitable subrogation on 16-1157 C (Dec. 17, 2019), BGT Holdings, LLC v. United States, No. 12-142 C (June 26, 2017) protective order against certain discovery requests that were outside representation that it had already provided all responsive documents; Bannum, Inc. v. United States, No. breach, and, even if it did, contractor cannot Here are five steps to take if you happen to face a breach of contract. Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States, No. Spearin 10-707 C (Dec. SBIR contract by failing to submit contract items (pallets) for claim to modify contract to correct alleged mistake in bid because post-hearing briefs, in contravention of court's orders, after The rules of most arbitration providers exclude cases within the jurisdiction of the small claims court or at least allow the parties to opt-out of even binding arbitration. 15-767 C (Apr. Ownership Disputes. 13-247 C (Feb. 12, 13-500 C (Mar. refuses to sanction the Government for spoliation because (i) the defense costs associated with suits by former employees of the company