CBCA 1069, 1144

Joe H. Scott, Sr., Living Trust

May 12, 2009Judge WaltersGENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Not published in the listingGranted in partby agreement

Key Facts

Appellant
Joe H. Scott, Sr., Living Trust
Respondent agency
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Judge
Walters
Case number
CBCA 1069, 1144This cell names 2 dockets: 1069, 1144.
Decided
May 12, 2009The decision states May 12, 2009 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Not published in the listingThe Board's year tables for 2007 through 2014 carry no Type column, so no disposition was published for this decision. It is not missing data and nothing is inferred from the document.
Law firm for the appellant
Steven M. Hamburg, P.C.
Outcome
Granted in partEntered by agreement of the parties.
These appeals are GRANTED IN PART.
Read from the shouted disposition line the Board prints above this decision's own date, and quoted from its operative sentence above. No model is involved.

Topics

Jurisdiction and timelinessPayment and interest

Topics are derived from each decision's own text by keyword rules, not a classification by the Board. A decision matching several topics carries all of them, so topic counts sum above the number of decisions. They are ordered strongest first.

Appearances

For the appellant
Steven M. Hamburg
Steven M. Hamburg, P.C.
Clayton, MO
For the respondent
James F. H. Scott
Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration
Washington, DC
Decision PDF (cbca.gov) Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act casesThe Board's year listing this row was read fromThe decision document is hosted by the Board itself, so it is an official copy, and the Board's own Contract Disputes Act case listing is the citable source. The topics, the disposition and the appearances above are read deterministically from the decision's own words; no model is involved.

Research This Decision

Create a free account to open this decision in the CBCA workspace: a grounded decision brief drafted from the Board's own words, the Insights dashboard over the whole corpus, and the filtered browser.

CBCA Decision Brief

A Workflows Hub brief on this decision, drafted from the captured text with every quote and authority checked against it.

Insights

Who prevails before the Board, by topic and by judge, with every denominator visible: merits rulings, not decisions.

Browse with Filters

The whole corpus by year, decision type, topic, judge and disposition, searchable across the decisions' own text.

Full Decision

Full text of the decision2 pages, 3,463 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided May 12, 2009 on its own faceRespondent GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

3 authorities read from this decision's own text, grouped by the body of law each comes from. Select one to read it at its publisher.

Other statutes1

Read from the decision's own words with no model involved. Statutes, regulations, the acts these forums argue by name, and cases at the board, this office or the Comptroller General are recognized; any other citation form is left out rather than guessed at, so this is a floor on what the decision cites.

GRANTED IN PART: May 12, 2009

CBCA 1069, 1144

JOE H. SCOTT, SR., LIVING TRUST,

Appellant,

v.

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,

Respondent.

Steven M. Hamburg of Steven M. Hamburg, P.C., Clayton, MO, counsel for

Appellant.

The case caption as the decision prints it. Every word is kept; the rule the Board draws around it is not text, so it is not repeated here.

James F. H. Scott, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), McCANN, and WALTERS.

WALTERS, Board Judge.

These appeals are currently before the Board on joint motion for judgment on a stipulated settlement. In March 2000, appellant, the Joe H. Scott, Sr., Living Trust (Trust), and respondent, the General Services Administration (GSA or Government), entered into a lease under lease contract number GS-04B-40815 for 26,826 rentable square feet of space in a three-story building in Deerfield Beach, Florida, for use by the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service. In 2005, as a result of Hurricane Wilma, the leased premises within the building encountered water and eventual mold damage. On July 27, 2007, the Trust filed a formal certified claim with the GSA contracting officer for $730,040.19 for mold remediation, which the Trust claimed had been necessary only because the Government had failed to provide the Trust with timely access to the leased premises so as to avert mold damage. On November 6, 2007, the contracting officer issued _______________________________

__________________________ _________________________ 2 CBCA 1069, 1144

a final decision denying the claim. The decision was appealed to the Board and docketed as CBCA 1144. This docket was consolidated with CBCA 1069, an earlier appeal relating to the denial of another claim.

The parties engaged in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) under the Board’s auspices and, as a result, achieved a settlement of the appeals and entered into an ADR settlement agreement and related stipulation of settlement, under which they agreed to a Board award in favor of the Trust in the amount of $325,000, a “stipulated judgment amount” to be paid from the permanent indefinite judgment fund,” 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2006). The stipulated judgment amount, they agreed, is inclusive of “all costs, direct and indirect, including but not limited to any attorney’s fees and expenses associated with CBCA 1069 and 1144.” By said stipulation, the parties further agreed that interest on the stipulated judgment amount “shall accrue at the rate specified by Section 12 of the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. Section 611 (2006) [(CDA)], from March 15, 2009, until the date of payment, and such interest shall be paid to the Trust together with the stipulated judgment amount” from the permanent indefinite judgment fund. Finally, by said stipulation, the parties agreed that neither “will seek reconsideration of, or relief from, the Board’s decision under Rules 26 and 27, respectively, and neither party will appeal the Board’s decision.”

Decision

These appeals are GRANTED IN PART. In accordance with the parties’ stipulation of settlement and joint motion, the Board awards appellant the sum of $325,000 for all claims under the consolidated appeals, together with interest as determined under the CDA, from March 15, 2009, until the date of payment. Payment of said sum and related CDA interest is to be made from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. § 1304. RICHARD C. WALTERS

Board Judge

We concur:

STEPHEN M. DANIELS

Board Judge

R. ANTHONY McCANN

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Joe H. Scott, Sr., Living Trust, CBCA 1069, 1144. Nothing is summarized or reworded, and the sections run in the order the Board wrote them. What the page shows and the text does not repeat is the pagination furniture: the page numbers and the rules the Board draws around its caption and under its signatures. The signatures are set back into the columns the Board prints them in, each judge under the name he or she signed, and the typed copy of that name the page carries beneath each signature is not repeated.

Related Decisions

Same Judge

Same Topic

Same Year

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.