Legal Opinion
H & M Moving, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided June 19, 1974No. 37-73PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBennett, Judge
Plaintiff, H & M Moving, Inc., a District of Columbia corporation, brings this contract action under section 2 of the Wunderlich Act, 41 U.S.C. § 322. In moving for summary judgment, plaintiff maintains that the failure of the Department of Commerce Appeals Board (DCAB), Docket No. OAS-1, February 28, 1972,1 to award travel time payments for the period from September 1,1969 through May 11,1970, was an error of law redressable in this court. Defendant has filed a cross-motion for summary judgment contending that the board was correct in disallowing travel time payments for the period from…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United States v. Georgia-Pacific CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- WPC Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- S&E Contractors, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1947
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Nvt Technologies, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- Grumman Data Systems Corporation v. John H. Dalton, Secretary of the Navy, and Intergraph Corporation, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- The Coca-Cola Company v. The Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- Blackwater Lodge & Training Center, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- S.E.R., Jobs for Progress, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.