Legal Opinion

Hoel-Steffen Construction Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 30, 1982No. 541-78PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNichols, Judge

This government contract case presents two issues for resolution. First, whether a contracting officer’s (CO) refusal to substitute subcontractors is arbitrary and capricious. Second, whether a contract provision which relieves the government of liability for a CO’s refusal to substitute subcontractors can preclude recovery where the CO’s refusal to substitute is plainly wrong. We hold that, in the instant case, the CO’s refusal to substitute was, in fact, arbitrary and capricious, or so grossly erroneous as to imply bad faith. We further hold that the exculpatory clause does not preclude…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. M. Steinthal & Co., Inc. v. Robert J. Seamans, Jr., Secretary of the Air Force, Pioneer Parachute Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
  2. Keco Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1974
  3. United States v. Erika, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Keco Industries, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
  5. United States v. WunderlichSupreme Court of the United States · 1951

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. North Star Alaska Housing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  2. Neal & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
  3. Distributed Solutions, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
  4. Holman Erection Co. v. Orville E. Madsen & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  5. Grimberg Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982

20 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