Union Paving Co. v. United States

107 Ct. Cl. 405, 1946 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 96, 1946 WL 4428
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedDecember 2, 1946
DocketNo. 46255
StatusPublished

This text of 107 Ct. Cl. 405 (Union Paving Co. v. United States) 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
Union Paving Co. v. United States, 107 Ct. Cl. 405, 1946 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 96, 1946 WL 4428 (cc 1946).

Opinion

Whitakek, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The plaintiff had a contract with defendant for the paving of runways, taxiways and apron strips at the Municipal Air* port at Atlantic City, New Jersey. It claims that it was required to use more concrete than that called for by the specifications ; it sues for the cost of the excess.

The contract was not well drawn, but we think that the contracting officer’s interpretation of it, affirmed on appeal by the head of the department, was correct. It certainly was not arbitrary, capricious, or so grossly erroneous as to imply bad faith. If not, it is final and conclusive under the provisions of article A9 of exhibit B to the proposal, which was embodied in the contract. This article reads:

On all questions relating to the acceptability of material, classification of material, proper execution of the work, and the interpretation of the specifications, the decision of the Contracting Officer shall be filial, subject to appeal as provided for in Article 15 of the contract.

Under such a provision and under the decisions of the Supreme Court and of this court it is final and conclusive. Plumley v. United States, 226 U. S. 545; McShain v. United States, 308 U. S. 512, 520-521; McCloskey & Co. v. United States, 103 C. Cls. 254.

The contract provided for the construction of the runways, etc., “in accordance with Schedule III of Proposal No. 1-43-261.” This schedule read in pertinent part:

Concrete pavement, plain — cement content per cubic yard of concrete to be 6.0 bags (approximate), 6" section with thickened edges, to be constructed one or two lanes at a time in accordance with Specification P-501 and drawing l-E-803, including necessary fine grading, preparation of subgrade in accordance with Specification P-103 and the furnishing of High Early strength Portland cement{ aggregates, and all materials complete in place for finished pavement.

[418]*418The contracting officer required the use of 6.0 bags of cement. The contractor says that it was required to use only 5 bags of cement, because this is the amount of cement specified in Specification P-501 for use in a mild climate, and it says that Atlantic City has a mild climate.

In order to determine what the contract means it will be helpful to review the preliminaries to its execution.

On October 13,1942 the Civil Aeronautics Administration-invited bids “for the paving of runways, taxiways and apron for the Atlantic City, New Jersey, Municipal Airport.” The invitation recited:

This proposal is No. 1-43-261 and requests for complete proposal should mention that number. The proposal with drawings, specifications, etc., can be obtained from the Regional Manager, First Region, Department of Commerce, Civil Aeronautics Administration, C. A. A, Building, LaGuardia Field, New York, N. Y.

The proposal secured from the designated official contained the following under ' the heading “Specifications and Drawings”:

The work is to be in accordance with applicable specifications and drawings attached hereto, the special provisions of this proposal, and in accordance with the following specifications and drawings:
Specification — See Exhibit “C” attached.
Deawings — See Exhibit “C” attached.
Exhibit “C” referred to above reads as follows:
(DRAWINGS LARGER THAN 8% X 11 — BOUND SEPARATELY)

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

Related

Plumley v. United States
226 U.S. 545 (Supreme Court, 1913)
United States v. John McShain, Inc.
308 U.S. 512 (Supreme Court, 1939)
Penker Construction Co. v. United States
96 Ct. Cl. 1 (Court of Claims, 1942)
McCloskey & Co. v. United States
103 Ct. Cl. 254 (Court of Claims, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 Ct. Cl. 405, 1946 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 96, 1946 WL 4428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-paving-co-v-united-states-cc-1946.