Aptus Co. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
REGINALD W. GIBSON, Senior Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The present action arises from the government’s termination for default of plaintiffs, *640Aptas Company’s, contract to install government-furnished equipment, and design, manufacture, and install contractor-furnished equipment at the government-owned and operated Sault Ste. Marie Hydroelectric Power Plant (the “Soo”) in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.2 The contractor’s right to proceed with work on the contract at issue, DACW35-99C-0001, was terminated for default on June 26, 2000, for failure to make progress,3 unsatisfactory work and unsound…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Moreland Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- R.P. Wallace, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- 5860 Chicago Ridge, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Aptus Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.