Crippen & Graen Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARGOLIS, Judge.
This contract case against the United States Department of the Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command, is before the court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. After a careful review of the entire record, and after hearing oral argument, the court has determined that it has jurisdiction to consider the plaintiff’s default termination claim, but does not have jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claim based on the contracting officer’s demand for the return of unliquidated progress payments. The contracting officer has not issued…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Emily Malone D/B/A Precision Cabinet Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Paragon Energy Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1981
- Z.A.N. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
- Nuclear Research Corporation v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Claude E. Atkins Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- The Sharman Company, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- AAI Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1991
- Todd Construction, L.P. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Overall Roofing & Construction Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1990
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.