Ross Construction Corporation v. The United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the Court
ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION AND DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
DAVIS, Judge.
We held in Anthony P. Miller, Inc. v. United States, 348 F.2d 475, 172 Ct.Cl. 60 (1965), that the Congressional limits on federal mortgage insurance for Cape-hart Act projects did not prevent a contractor from recovering for losses or expenses incurred as a result of defective government plans or specifications, or for unforeseen conditions falling within the “changed conditions” clause, or on account of Government errors in interpreting the specifications. That case (and those following it) involved “on-site”…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. DickersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Sutton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Myerle v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1897
- Ferris v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1892
- Dougherty ex rel. Slavens v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Foster Construction C. A. And Williams Brothers Company, a Joint Venture, Etc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
- Raymond Constructors of Africa, Ltd. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969