Legal Opinion

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided May 1, 1951No. 45658PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WHITAKER, Judge.

In our former opinion, 116 Ct.Cl. 679, 90 F.Supp. 963, 965, we held that plaintiff was “entitled to recover such amount as this court may finally determine is proper as an equitable adjustment on account of the latent conditions encountered which differed from those which plaintiff had a right to expect.” We said, however, that “plaintiff is limited to a recovery based upon the finding of the head of the department on October 30, 1937, that the latent conditions encountered which entitle plaintiff to an equitable adjustment were those conditions resulting from the fact that it…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Loftis v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948
  2. Penker Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1942
  3. Helvetia Milk Condensing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1932
  4. Joseph Meltzer, Inc. of New Jersery v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948
  5. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1950

3Cited by26 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. Servidone Construction Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
  3. James A. Boyajian, Assignee of Triumph Manufacturing Company, Bankrupt v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
  4. F. H. McGraw & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1955
  5. River Construction Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1962

21 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