Legal Opinion

Barnard-Curtiss Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided April 4, 1962No. 491-59PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJoNes, Chief Judge

This case was submitted to us on stipulated facts, and without oral argument, for our determination.

Plaintiff Barnard-Curtiss Company seeks to recover additional costs incurred as a result of flood damage occurring during the course of its performance of a construction contract with defendant.

Plaintiff contracted with the Bureau of Beelamation on November 27,1958, to construct and complete the earthwork and structures necessary for the rehabilitation of the Ver-mejo Diversion Dam, the Yermejo Canal, and the Eagle Tail Canal, all of which were located in the vicinity of Maxwell, New Mexico.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Donovan Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1957

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Keydata Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1974
  2. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation and Polytron Company, by and Through Walsh Construction Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
  3. Mitsui & Co. v. Puerto Rico Water Resources AuthorityDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1981
  4. George Hyman Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
  5. Blount Brothers Construction Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965

7 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