Schutt Construction Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtJones, Senior Judge
The primary issue in this case is whether, under the facts here involved, an excavating contractor is equitably entitled to reimbursement for a 15 percent overrun in the amount of trees and brush cleared under a lump-sum contract.1
On June 1, 1953, the Army Corps of Engineers solicited lump-sum bids for clearing all the trees and brush along a 20-mile stretch of the Cumberland River near Nashville, Tennessee. The bid specifications stated that there were approximately 10,480 acres involved, but that only approximately 2,828 acres were actually wooded; the rest being farm land. The…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Glidden Co. v. ZdanokSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Severin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1943
- Burkhardt v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1949
- Winn-Senter Const. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948
- Loftis v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Perini Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
- Kanehl v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
- Timber Investors, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1978
- First Hartford Corp. Pension Plan & Trust v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1998
- Asphalt Roads & Materials Co. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1999
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.