George W. Sturm, Doing Business as George W. Sturm Associates 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.
This is a little ease in which, once again, the Government’s contract suffers from the endemic disease of ambiguity and imprecision. The remedy, once again, is the conventional one taken from the standard legal pharmacopeia. In July 1963, George W. Sturm entered into a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with the Maritime Administration to conduct a study on the feasibility of using plastic membranes in double-bottom tanks for ocean-going vessels. The agreement called for completion no later than six months after…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- WPC Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1947
- Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, American Export Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc., Third-Party Intervenor v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
3Cited by55 opinions
- Metric Constructors, Inc. v. National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- The Firestone Tire & Rubber Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971
- Fincke v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
- Thanet Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1979
- Metcalf Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.