Legal Opinion
Engineered Maintenance Services, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 20, 2003No. 96-625CPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAMICH, Chief Judge.
I. Introduction
This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (RCFC). Defendant contends that it was justified in terminating for default its contract with the Plaintiff, Engineered Maintenance Services, Inc. (“EMS”). According to Defendant, Plaintiff failed to give proper notice of its claim for differing site conditions and, moreover, cannot successfully assert excusable delay under the differing site condition clause. For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant’s motion is…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mary Ann Jay and Michael H. Jay, as Legal Representatives of Matthew Michael Jay, Deceased v. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Gasser Chair Company, Inc., and George Gasser v. Infanti Chair Manufacturing Corp., and Vittorio InfantiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Darwin Construction Co., Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Renda Marine, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Edge Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- ECC International LLCArmed Services Board of Contract Appeals · 2021
- Harry Pepper and Associates, Inc.Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · 2020
- Marine Industrial Construction, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022