6319663431

Martin Brothers Construction

September 30, 2026Judge Eyester
Partially SustainedContract Changes / Constructive ChangesContract InterpretationInspection / Acceptance / Warranty / Latent DefectsPayment / Progress Payments / FinancingAccord & Satisfaction / Release / Waiver

Martin Brothers Construction appealed the denial of claims arising from levee reconstruction work, including additional excavation, levee fill, hydroseeding, and payment disputes. The Board held that MBC was entitled to payment for excavation and hydroseeding, was not entitled to payment for noncompliant levee fill, and remanded for determination of quantum.

Material Facts

  • The contract required excavation, levee fill, compaction, hydroseeding, testing, and compliance with safety requirements for levee repairs.
  • The contract used estimated quantities with fixed unit prices and included variations-in-estimated-quantity and changes clauses.
  • Government responses to RFIs stated that the levee toe should be projected 3:1 from the existing hinge and that the repair dimensions might need adjustment.
  • MBC notified the Corps of expected quantity overruns for excavation and levee fill at sites 18 and 19.
  • MBC initially placed existing levee material before submitting the required testing results, and the Corps halted fill placement.
  • Testing showed failures involving plasticity, compaction, moisture conditioning, and the reliability and completeness of testing data.
  • The Corps stopped excavation at site 18 after observing vertical cuts ranging from 5-8 feet and required MBC to reconstruct the site using a 1.5:1 slope.
  • MBC completed the work at sites 18 and 19 and later submitted additional testing data and surveys.
  • The Corps accepted some sites but determined that sites 18 and 19 were unacceptable in material type and placement.
  • The Corps did not remediate sites 18 and 19 as of February 2024.
  • MBC's expert relied in part on the levees' performance during a 2023 flood event, while the Corps's expert identified testing and material-quality deficiencies.
  • The Corps did not invoke the warranty clause to replace the hydroseeding.

Parties

Appellant
Martin Brothers Construction
Respondent Agency
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Contracting Agency
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Contract Number
W91238-18-C-0030
Open Official Decision PDF (asbca.mil)AI-analyzed, grounded in the decision text. Verify against the official PDF before relying on it.

Full Legal Analysis

Create a free account to read the complete grounded legal brief for this decision, including the holding, every issue the Board decided, quantum, verified citations, and the case's citation graph.

Holding & Legal Reasoning

The Board's holding, background, and procedural posture for this decision.

Issues Presented

Every issue the Board decided, with its determination, reasoning, and supporting authority.

Quantum & Recovery

The claimed, awarded, and net dollar amounts at issue, itemized where the record supports it.

Verified Authorities & Citations

Every cited FAR, DFARS, CAS, and case-law authority, cross-checked against the source text.

Practitioner Takeaways

Practical guidance for contractors and counsel, distilled from the Board's ruling.

Similar Cases

Related decisions surfaced by semantic search across the full analyzed corpus.

Citation Graph

An interactive graph of this case's cited authorities, judge, agency, and related decisions.

Related Decisions

Same Judge

Same Year

Same Issue

Newsletter

New decisions every Monday

GovConDash Weekly lists the decisions GAO, the boards, the courts and SBA OHA released that week, alongside the FAR Overhaul deviations and proposed rules that reach every contractor. Free.

Free, weekly, and one click to unsubscribe. We send a confirmation email first. See our Privacy Policy.