Dura-Installation Service

Court of Claims

Dura-Installation Service

578 F.2d 1388, 24 Cont. Cas. Fed. 81,807, 215 Ct. Cl. 1003, 1978 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 22

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedJanuary 27, 1978

DocketNo. 356-75

StatusPublished

This text of 578 F.2d 1388 (Dura-Installation Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dura-Installation Service, 578 F.2d 1388, 24 Cont. Cas. Fed. 81,807, 215 Ct. Cl. 1003, 1978 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 22 (cc 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

-Plaintiff contracted to install aluminum skirtings on mobile homes used to provide temporary emergency shelter for families displaced by flooding caused by tropical storm Agnes in 1972. In the present action seeking to overturn denial by the General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals of plaintiffs appeals, plaintiffs first claim involves denial of an $85 per-unit incentive bonus, provided by an amendment to the contract, for accelerated completion. The second claim is for costs and lost profits for 477 units allegedly contracted for but not ultimately ordered to be skirted. In a recommended opinion (reported in full at 24 CCF ¶ 81,807), Trial Judge Kenneth R. Harkins held that of the 3,523 units plaintiff is entitled to recover the incentive bonus on 2,429 units, and that plaintiff is not entitled to recover on its second claim. On January 27, 1978 the court, by order, adopted the recommended decision as the basis for its judgment in this case, concluding and ordering that plaintiff is entitled to recover on the portion of its claim allowed and that judgment be entered for plaintiff for $206,465 with the petition dismissed as to the remainder of plaintiffs claim.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

-Plaintiff contracted to install aluminum skirtings on mobile homes used to provide temporary emergency shelter for families displaced by flooding caused by tropical storm Agnes in 1972. In the present action seeking to overturn denial by the General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals of plaintiffs appeals, plaintiffs first claim involves denial of an $85 per-unit incentive bonus, provided by an amendment to the contract, for accelerated completion. The second claim is for costs and lost profits for 477 units allegedly contracted for but not ultimately ordered to be skirted. In a recommended opinion (reported in full at 24 CCF ¶ 81,807), Trial Judge Kenneth R. Harkins held that of the 3,523 units plaintiff is entitled to recover the incentive bonus on 2,429 units, and that plaintiff is not entitled to recover on its second claim. On January 27, 1978 the court, by order, adopted the recommended decision as the basis for its judgment in this case, concluding and ordering that plaintiff is entitled to recover on the portion of its claim allowed and that judgment be entered for plaintiff for $206,465 with the petition dismissed as to the remainder of plaintiffs claim.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

578 F.2d 1388, 24 Cont. Cas. Fed. 81,807, 215 Ct. Cl. 1003, 1978 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dura-installation-service-cc-1978.