CCM Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FUTEY, Judge.
This case is before the court after a trial on the merits. Plaintiff, a construction contractor, claims that the presence of tar beneath a concrete walkway constitutes an unanticipated site condition which entitles it to an equitable adjustment of a contract price. In addition, plaintiff requests compensation for performance delays allegedly caused by defendant from approximately June 1, 1983, until “sometime” in October 1983. In response, defendant asserts that plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the tar-based waterproofing system is materially different from the…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Lisbon Contractors, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Wunderlich Contracting Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
- Commerce International Company, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
- Koppers Company, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1968
- Electronic and Missile Facilities, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Mega Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
- CJP Contractors, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1999
- CEMS, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- A.S. McGaughan Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1991
- Sergent Mechanical Systems, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.