Legal Opinion

Carman v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided October 8, 1958No. 116-52PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLittletoN, Judge

Plaintiff seeks to recover additional compensation for extra work performed in reclearing certain areas in connection with its contract to clear an area in the vicinity of the Heyburn Dam Project. Plaintiff contends that it is entitled to the extra compensation on the ground that the order to reclear the area in question amounted to a change under Article 8 of the contract, or in the alternative, that the flood which occurred on May 19,1949, and which occasioned the extra work, was a changed condition within the meaning of Article 4 of the contract. Defendant urges that plaintiff has failed…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. De Armas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1947
  2. Tacoma Dredging Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1917

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. J. D. Hedin Construction Company, Inc., for Its Own Use and for the Use of Fischbach & Moore, Its Sub-Contractor v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
  2. H.L.C. & Associates Construction Company, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
  3. Perini Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
  4. Daewoo Engineering & Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  5. Turnkey Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1979

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API