On May 9, 2024, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals ("ASBCA" or "Board") allowed a contractor to recover for a "constructive" value engineering change proposal ("VECP"). In Appeal of Herman JCG Co. JV, ASBCA No....more
In an unpublished opinion filed February 20, 2024, Division 1 of the Washington Court of Appeals held in C.A. Carey Corporation v. City of Snoqualmie that compliance with the WSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and...more
In Granite Construction Company, ASBCA No. 62281 (November 1, 2023), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals ("Board") addressed the issue of what constitutes a reasonable period of time to suspend work under the...more
12/7/2023
/ Appeals ,
Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals ,
Business Interruption ,
Construction Industry ,
Construction Project ,
Contractors ,
Delay Claims ,
Employment Litigation ,
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) ,
Federal Contractors ,
US Army Corps of Engineers ,
Work Suspensions
In Appeal of Derian, Inc., ASBCA No. 62957 (August 25, 2023), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals provided detailed guidance on how to price a deductive change order and what evidence should be utilized to establish...more
There is a reason why contractors need to review their contracts closely and the Washington Court of Appeals' decision in King County v Walsh Construction Company II LLC, No. 83787-7-1 (Wash. App. Ct. 2023) ("Walsh")...more
The decision in Williams Building Company v. Department of State, CBCA 6650 (April 26, 2023) is another warning about the risk of executing a contract modification without an appropriate reservation of rights.
Williams...more
In JE Dunn Construction Company (ASBCA No. 62936 April 25, 2022) the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals took up the issue of whether the sovereign acts doctrine barred a contractor's claim for additional costs arising...more
"Men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government." So began the Court of Claims decision entitled Lodge Construction, Inc. v. United States, Nos. 13-499 and 13-800 (January 1, 2022), which the court described...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ECC International Constructors, LLC (ASBCA No. 59643 November 9, 2021) issued a partial summary judgment order dismissing several of the contractor's claims for lack of a sum...more
The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals in Wu & Associates granted the contractor's motion for partial summary judgment on entitlement to recover additional funds to strengthen flooring to move heavy equipment for an elevator...more
The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals in Wu & Associates granted the contractor's motion for partial summary judgment on entitlement to recover additional funds to strengthen flooring to move heavy equipment for an elevator...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in September 2021 issued a partial summary judgment order dismissing a contractor's constructive acceleration claim asserting that the Government had not timely reviewed its steel...more
In Sauer, Inc. (September 29, 2021), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals discussed the limits of authority that a Government representative had to utilize substitute materials in lieu of materials specified in a task...more
In Michael Johnson Logging v. Department of Agriculture (July 20, 2021), the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA or the Board) discussed the government's implied duty of good faith and fair dealing in the context of a...more
In Nauset Construction Corporation,1 the Armed Service Board of Contract Appeals once again addressed how Government allegations of fraud impact the Board's ability to hear a claim....more
In Carothers Construction, Inc., the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals discussed the contractor's burden in submitting an "or equal" product. The contract incorporated FAR 52.336-5, Material and Workmanship, which...more
In Harry Pepper and Associates, Inc., the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals addressed three exceptions to the strict enforcement of claim notice requirements in the context of a Government motion for summary judgment...more
In JAAAT Technical Services, LLC, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) addressed the breadth of application of the Severin doctrine, which restricts a prime contractor's ability to file claims on behalf of a...more
On September 14, 2020, Division One of the Washington Court of Appeals provided clarification in the case of Lake Hill Investments, LLC. V Rushforth Construction Company, Inc., Case No. 79116-8-I, on how the Spearin Doctrine...more
In Regiment Construction Corp., CBCA 6449 (October 1, 2020), the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA) addressed the interplay between contractor claims and Government fraud allegations. The matter arose when the...more
A decision just issued by the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA) offers guidance on how the federal government may respond to COVID-19 claims. In this case, there was an outbreak of Ebola at the project site, and the...more
In Future Forest, LLC, CBCA 5863 (March 9, 2020), the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals discussed the relationship between a minimum delivery order, comments on what volume of deliveries the contractor could anticipate under...more
In Panther Brands, LLC v. The United States, No. 16-1157C (December 17, 2019), the Court of Federal Claims addressed the elements of an implied-in-fact contract in the context of a motion for summary judgment dismissal of the...more
In AMEC Foster Wheeler Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc., CBCA 5168, 6298 (November 13, 2019), the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals rejected in large part a federal contractor’s claims due to inconsistencies between the...more
In Kudsk Construction Inc. v. The United States, No. 18-1032C (August 30, 2019), the Court of Federal Claims addressed damages in the context of a delayed notice to proceed and addressed the Christian doctrine in the context...more