Olson Construction Co. v. United States

In this construction contract case the plaintiffs allege two bases of recovery: (1) that there was a mutual mistake and oversight in that the written contract failed to express the true intention of the parties and, as a result, plaintiffs were required to furnish more expensive insulation material than was contemplated, and therefore the contract should be reformed; (2) plaintiffs claim in the alternative that under *255the terms of the contract they were given an election in the use of three types of insulation material; that defendant ordered plaintiffs to use only one, the most expensive of…