Malan Construction Corporation v. United States

Second Circuit

Malan Construction Corporation v. United States

318 F.2d 709, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5150

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 1963

Docket27722_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 318 F.2d 709 (Malan Construction Corporation v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Malan Construction Corporation v. United States, 318 F.2d 709, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5150 (2d Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to the Wunderlich Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 321, 322, plaintiff brought this action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for additional compensation under a contract it had with the Veterans Administration, claiming it was ordered to perform work it was not contractually required to perform. Pursuant to the standard government contract “disputes clause” plaintiff’s claim was submitted to the Contracting Officer, whose decision was adverse to plaintiff. Appeal was taken to the Construction Contract Appeals Board which also denied the claim.

*710 Plaintiff complains, though agreeing with the Government that there are no genuine issues of fact in dispute, that the Veterans Administration’s procedures adopted in its case denied it procedural due process and denied it its constitutional rights, violated the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 1001 et seep; and the final decision adverse to it was not supported by substantial evidence.

We hold, as Judge Cashin held, that there is no merit to appellant’s claims, and we affirm the district court judgment on the opinion below.

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

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to the Wunderlich Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 321, 322, plaintiff brought this action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for additional compensation under a contract it had with the Veterans Administration, claiming it was ordered to perform work it was not contractually required to perform. Pursuant to the standard government contract “disputes clause” plaintiff’s claim was submitted to the Contracting Officer, whose decision was adverse to plaintiff. Appeal was taken to the Construction Contract Appeals Board which also denied the claim.

*710 Plaintiff complains, though agreeing with the Government that there are no genuine issues of fact in dispute, that the Veterans Administration’s procedures adopted in its case denied it procedural due process and denied it its constitutional rights, violated the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 1001 et seep; and the final decision adverse to it was not supported by substantial evidence.

We hold, as Judge Cashin held, that there is no merit to appellant’s claims, and we affirm the district court judgment on the opinion below.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

318 F.2d 709, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 5150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malan-construction-corporation-v-united-states-ca2-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack