108 results for 'cat:"Government" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Christiansen Forster upholds the Utah Procurement Policy Board's conclusion that a bid for a five-year contract to provide drug and alcohol testing for the child and family services division was unresponsive. The Board was not unreasonable or incorrect, having adequately reviewed the record and considered the bidder's arguments. Substantial evidence that the bidder offered fewer collection sites and fewer qualified staff available to testify in court cases supported the rejection. Affirmed.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Christiansen Forster, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 20220388-CA, Categories: government, contract
J. Russel finds the lower court improperly concluded that sovereign immunity barred the successor's claims. The Virginia Department of Transportation contracted a contractor for construction inspection and permitted them to bill VDOT for certain overhead costs, including the cost of rental vehicles. Because of the nature of the projects at issue, VDOT, in turn, could seek reimbursement from the federal government for the expenses it reimbursed so long as VDOT complied with Federal Acquisition Regulation provisions. The FAR clauses purportedly did not allow VDOT to receive reimbursement for expenses paid to the successor, an entity under its common control. The parties eventually mediated the claims and agreed upon a settlement agreement that the contractor felt it had no choice, given its economic situation, but to sign. It later received information previously withheld that led to the suit, filed in part to invalidate the settlement agreement. Sovereign immunity doesn’t apply to claims based on express contracts. Reversed.
Court: Virginia Supreme Court, Judge: Russel , Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 230365, Categories: government, Immunity, contract
J. Seabright refuses to dismiss part of a fired employee’s complaint against state deputy attorneys general for informing his Japanese employer about his previous litigation history. One of these attorneys general does not have qualified immunity as there is evidence of the deputy attorney general contacting his former employer. There is also evidence of malice and that she would have known about the employee’s employment contract at the Japanese company. Emotional distress claims are dismissed, however, as the act was not “outrageous.”
Court: USDC Hawaii, Judge: Seabright, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv359, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: government, Interference With contract, Employment Retaliation
[Consolidated.] J. Crain finds that the trial court should not have denied incorporation of the proposed City of St. George after voters approved the incorporation. The record supports the "reasonableness" of the incorporation as it relates to Baton Rouge because St. George is an identifiable area with a thriving business community, its own fire department, and the desire for its own school district. Further, the economic and population growth is unique to St. George and not dependent on Baton Rouge. Also, Baton Rouge can be positively affected by St. George’s growing population since money will stay in the parish, and the record shows that St. George can provide public services within a reasonable period of time. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court, Judge: Crain, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 2023-C-01108, Categories: government, contract
J. Mcnulty grants the government's motion for summary judgment. The contractor contracted to build a new roof for the San Diego Naval Base Commissary. Requests for materials price increases were denied, being the contract was fixed price, and the contractor submitted a claim for $452,108 for materials price escalations. The claim is not dependent on whether the government was late in issuing the notice to proceed, due to COVID delays. The contractor's constructive change theory based on delays would be considered a new claim that the board does not have jurisdiction to consider.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Mcnulty , Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 63631, Categories: government, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Eyester denies the contractor's claim for price increases. Contracted for tree removal, pruning and roadside trimming at Lake O’ the Pines, Texas, the contractor claims the Army Corps of Engineers misclassified certain services causing a $7,117 increase in performance. While certain pruning services were removed from the contract and tree removal was increased due to a deep freeze, this does not establish a prior course of dealing eliminating performance on other task orders. There is no prior course of dealing evidencing the waiver of performance.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Eyester, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 63768, Categories: Environment, government, contract
J. Fischer finds that while the port authority is an arm of the state, it is not exempt or immune from being assessed prejudgment interest in the current case, where the developer obtained a judgment as a creditor for the port's breach of a development contract. Therefore, the case must be remanded for a proper calculation of interest. Reversed.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Fischer, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1501, Categories: government, Damages, contract
J. Mclish denies the contractor’s appeal claiming it was underpaid by the Army Corps of Engineers to construct a seepage berm at a state prison in Louisiana. The contract contained an estimation of compacted fill amount, providing that the contractor would be paid the actual amount used as measured by the Corps’ surveys. The contractor raised no objection involving the survey that was conducted, which indicates its understanding of the contract was the same as the Corps’. Though the contractor now offers a different interpretation of the contract regarding its excavation and removal of organic material, it gives no evidentiary support that it held this interpretation all along.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Mclish, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 63632, Categories: government, Military, contract
J. O'Connell denies the contractor's motion for judgment on the pleadings. Contracted to furnish and deliver food in Afghanistan, the contractor was paid with some flexibility in its unit pricing. The contractor later disclosed a former employee had engaged in bid rigging, which resulted in higher prices. Though the contractor says the government's bringing of another supplier into the contract results in its having no right to recover funds, this did not give the contractor a right to charge more because of its corrupt employee. The contractor had a duty to comply with the law and the contract.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: O'Connell , Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 60309, Categories: Fraud, government, contract
J. Wilson grants the Army Corps of Engineers’ motion to dismiss. The contractor, contracted to install modular classrooms for the Texas Elementary School, appeals for $1,087,853 in allegedly unpaid funds, costs, damages, and lost profits incurred by the Corps’ adding work beyond specifications, providing faulty designs, and causing delays. The contractor withdrew from settlement negotiations and the Corp variously approved and denied its request for equitable adjustment. The record shows that the appeal window started when the contractor received the officer’s final decision. The notice of appeal was filed nearly two and a half years beyond the 90-day timeframe and is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 63605, Categories: government, Jurisdiction, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Melnick denies the Army Corps of Engineer’s motion to dismiss. The contractor seeks $962,775 in costs related to its building a disputed access road for its contract to design and construct a seepage barrier at the Portsmouth, Ohio, levee. The contracting officer provided the contractor with a date for its final decision without providing an explanation, and the contractor submitted its certified claim. The contractor has filed most claims in these consolidated appeals within the default period.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Melnick , Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 63641, Categories: government, contract
J. Johnson reverses the district court's denial of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's motion for judgment as a matter of law in a case surrounding a road-construction contract, but affirms its entry of judgment in favor of the contractor on a claim for statutory interest penalties. The contractor did not provide evidence sufficient to prove that the Department breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, specifically failing to demonstrate that the Department's refusal to approve all of the contractor's requested haul roads was motivated by an improper ulterior motive. Desire to reduce damage to county roads as requested by the county is not such an improper motive, and the Department's disapproval of the use of certain roads for hauling is among the risks the contractor expressly assumed. The Department did, however, agree to pay additional compensation to the contractor, and that compensation is therefore an "undisputed billing" incurring interest penalties for untimely payment. Reversed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: A23-0664, Categories: government, contract
J. Boulware denies the subcontractor's motion for summary judgment. After issues with securing government funds for its work on Nellis Airforce Base, the contractor communicated with the electrical subcontractor regarding tracking of expenses. The subcontractor replied with altered invoices, eventually refusing to endorse a payment check for less than the claimed amount. Many disputes of material fact on fraud and contract claims and counterclaims remain.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Boulware, Filed On: March 31, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv573, NOS: Miller Act - Contract, Categories: Fraud, government, contract
J. Byrne finds that the trial court improperly ruled against a public charter school, denying its plea to the jurisdiction in a breach of contract case filed by a law firm accusing the school of failing to pay for legal services. The law firm failed to show that the contract was ratified by the school board, thus establishing a waiver of immunity. Because such a waiver has not been established, the school's jurisdictional plea should have been granted and the law firm's claims dismissed. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Byrne, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 03-22-00200-CV, Categories: government, Immunity, contract
J. Lewis grants the medical transport service's request for default judgment, awarding it $469,000 in damages and interest. The service subcontracted to provide transport for Veterans Affairs, the company under which it contracted later having a controlling interest obtained by the other party to this suit. This party failed to pay the service after it entered into a new contract with the service. The service has established the new contractor failed to perform under the contract.
Court: USDC South Carolina Aiken, Judge: Lewis , Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv2801, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: government, Damages, contract
J. Flood finds that the trial court ruled properly in this challenge of a contract bid award to provide the state with electronic platform tracking liens and titles. The bidding company, eDealer Services, properly pleaded that the committee improperly applied the methodology used to determine "best value" when considering the bids. The trial court also had the authority to order the contract to be awarded to eDealer Services instead of remanding for further findings. Affirmed.
Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals, Judge: Flood, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: COA23-680, Categories: government, contract
J. Dietz denies both parties' motions for summary judgment in this breach of contract dispute against the government related to a contract to provide instructor services to the Army. There are genuine issues in dispute as to whether the Army breached the contract and acted in bad faith.
Court: Court of Federal Claims, Judge: Dietz, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 19-1390, Categories: government, contract
Per curiam, the Texas Supreme Court vacates the court of appeals' judgment in a governmental immunity case in which a contractor claimed that the city of Hutto failed to pay it after its work was complete. The court of appeals agreed with the city's assertion that the contractor's claims were barred by governmental immunity because the contract signed between the parties was not properly completed. However, due to the Texas legislature's recent passage of a bill requiring governmental entities to notify contractors of failures to properly complete the contract process before beginning work, the case must be remanded to the trial court for further consideration.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 22-0973, Categories: government, Immunity, contract
J. Wilson grants the government's motion to dismiss this appeal. The contractor, which had an indefinite delivery and quantity contract for architectural and engineering services involving the design of military and civil projects within the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Mission Boundaries, failed to file its appeal within 90 days of receiving the contracting officer’s final decision.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Wilson , Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 63515, Categories: government, Due Process, contract
J. Dorrian finds the lower court properly granted the state of Ohio's motion to dismiss the construction company's interference with a contract claim. Although the company's income fell significantly after certain projects were diverted to another agency within the state, the agencies assigning and completing the work are both arms of the state and, therefore, the company could not satisfy the outside party requirement of the claim. However, because evidence in the record shows the state agencies misled individuals about whether certain projects were covered by the construction company's services contract with the state, it has stated a viable contract claim, which will be reinstated upon remand. Affirmed in part.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Dorrian, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-824, Categories: Construction, government, Interference With contract
[Consolidated.] J. Wilson denies the government's motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Contracted for building repair at Ft. Gordon, Georgia, the contractor seeks equitable adjustment of almost $4 million for additional costs, as well as a time extension. Though the government says the board does not have jurisdiction because the contractor filed in advance of the contracting officer's deemed denial or final decision, the record shows the officer did not need additional time to issue a final decision. This appeal, however, is dismissed as moot, due to the contractor's subsequent filing of an appeal from the officer’s final decision denying the same claim.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Wilson , Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 63674, Categories: government, Due Process, contract
J. Carter denies a temporary restraining order to a casino developer who accused the Northern Mariana Islands of overcharging it for missed casino license fees and violating constitutional contract clauses. The developer could not show that an additional regulatory fee is an unreasonable impairment as the developer paid the fees for several years before it stopped. The commonwealth has not violated due process, as the interactions and relationship between its casino commission and the developer during previous litigation do not constitute a conflict of interest.
Court: USDC Northern Mariana Islands, Judge: Carter, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 1:24cv1, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: government, contract
J. Taylor denies the Navy's motion for summary judgment on a contractor's action seeking payment for costs incurred due to severe weather. It alleges the government building project design changes on the joint reserve center in Des Moines, Iowa pushed construction into adverse weather periods. Though the government says the contractor signed a release resolving all costs, impact effect and delays arising out of or incidental to changes, material factual disputes remain as to whether the parties had a meeting of the minds as to the substance of the release.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Taylor , Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 63291, Categories: government, Military, contract
J. Dennis finds the district court properly granted summary judgment to Raytheon on a former systems engineer's allegations of retaliation for his reporting of misrepresentations the company allegedly made involving the recalibration of a radar system. Certain case law bars review of claims implicating the merits of Raytheon's decision to revoke the engineer's security clearance, and the circuit lacks jurisdiction over those claims. The employee has not cited any specific facts he needed and was prevented from discovering that would create a dispute of material fact as to whether the action was materially adverse. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Dennis , Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 21-11060, Categories: Fraud, government, contract
J. Arnett denies the Army's motion to dismiss the contractor's appeal. The contractor filed an appeal from the denial of its claim involving missing trucks arising from orders against a blanket purchase agreement for the government to place call orders for material-handling equipment in Erbil, Iraq. The board lacks sufficient information to resolve the dispute over whether the claim for missing trucks includes separate claims or is one claim arising from the same facts.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Arnett , Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 63522, Categories: government, Military, contract
J. Eyester denies the Navy's motion for summary judgment. The contractor appeals the partial denial of its claim for compensation related to asbestos abatement at a building on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California. The contractor, after the unforeseen finding of asbestos during its renovation, claimed defective specifications and submitted a cost proposal for its proposed change to demolish and replace walls. The matter was insufficiently briefed and there are disputed facts regarding the number of days of delay, and whether any government-caused delays were concurrent with delays within the contractor's control.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Eyester, Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 62627, Categories: government, Military, contract
J. O'Connell grants the government's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and for summary judgment based on a release. The government denied payment to a contractor for certain dry and heavy cargo transfer removal because it allegedly never submitted an invoice. The contractor received consideration of $808,000. Even if it was entitled to this money and the removal request claim was entirely valid, the release is still enforceable.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: O'Connell , Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 62319, Categories: government, contract
[Consolidated.] J. Stinson grants the contractor's motion for summary judgment. The Army Corp of Engineer's contracting officer denied the contractor's claims regarding defective specification and differing site conditions as to its contract to perform repairs to the Tuttle Creek Stilling Basin. The government argues the contractor failed to raise the issue of additional costs incurred for sidewalk placement prior to contract award, waiving its right to challenge liquidated damages. The contractor was not aware of the additional costs pre-award.
Court: Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeals, Judge: Stinson , Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 62657, Categories: government, contract