Legal Opinion · Dissent

Interwest Construction v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided July 12, 1994No. 94-1040Published

1DissentPauline Newman, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. It is inequitable to require the contractor to pay for the VA’s after-the-fact reading of the specification, when the specification was, in retrospect, ambiguous, when the ambiguity was latent, and the contractor’s reading was reasonable. The government now has the benefit of a chiller that is $72,000 more expensive than the chiller that was bid, at the expense of the contractor who was free of fault. I would remand for a fair allocation of the burdens flowing from the government’s less-than-perfect specification.

A

This is not a case of a contractor cutting corners by…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. WPC Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
  2. Community Heating & Plumbing Company, Inc. v. Admiral Frank B. Kelso, Ii, Acting Secretary of the NavyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
  3. Beacon Construction Co. of Massachusetts v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
  4. Newsom v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
  5. Interstate General Government Contractors, Inc. v. Michael P.W. Stone, Secretary of the ArmyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992

2 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