Legal Opinion
LaCoste v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided January 8, 1986No. 233-85CPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NETTESHEIM, Judge.
This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has opposed.1
FACTS
The parties do not dispute the following facts. Plaintiff Jack LaCoste (“plaintiff”) seeks pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. §§ 601-613 (1982) (the “CDA”), additional compensation in the amount of $30,000 for extra costs incurred under a contract with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (the “Corps”). The contract entered into on June 25, 1974, for the amount of $68,400, obligated plaintiff to build a sewer-holding tank system at the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Nager Electric Company, Inc. And Keystone Engineering Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
- In Re Donald H. ThorpeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- United Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
- Kasler/Continental Heller/Fruin Colnon v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1985
- Vemo Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Pathman Construction Company, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Farmers Grain Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1988
- Maryland State Police v. Warwick Supply & Equipment Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
- Kunz Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.