CBCA 1809

Caddell Construction Co., Inc.

Mar 25, 2011Judge VergilioGENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Not published in the listingGranted

Key Facts

Appellant
Caddell Construction Co., Inc.
Respondent agency
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Judge
Vergilio
Case number
CBCA 1809
Decided
Mar 25, 2011The decision states Mar 25, 2011 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
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP
Outcome
Granted
The Board GRANTS the appeal.
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

Payment 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.

Appearances

For the appellant
James F. Archibald, III
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP
Birmingham, AL
For the respondent
Leigh Erin S. Izzo
Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration
New York, NY
For the respondent
Catherine Crow
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, 1,981 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Mar 25, 2011 on its own faceRespondent GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

5 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.

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: March 25, 2011

CBCA 1809

CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.,

Appellant,

v.

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,

Respondent.

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. Archibald, III, of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP, Birmingham, AL, counsel for Appellant.

Leigh Erin S. Izzo, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, New York, NY; and Catherine Crow, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges BORWICK, VERGILIO, and GOODMAN.

VERGILIO, Board Judge.

On November 25, 2009, the Board received from Caddell Construction Co., Inc.

(contractor) a notice of appeal seeking $414,383 which it claims the General Services Administration (Government) wrongfully deducted from its contract, GS-07P-05-UEC-3003, to construct a courthouse in El Paso, Texas. The dispute focuses upon copper scrim anchors, and their inclusion or not in the contract. The Board has jurisdiction over this timely-filed appeal pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (CDA), 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109 (previously 41 U.S.C. §§ 601-613 (2006)).

In a motion for stipulated award dated March 24, 2011, the parties jointly request the Board to enter judgment for the contractor in the amount of $414,383, plus interest from March 23, 2011, until payment by the judgment fund, in full and final settlement of the claims presented. The amount includes costs, attorney fees, and interest under the CDA. ______________________________

________________________ ________________________

2 CBCA 1809

Each party agrees that it will not seek reconsideration, and will not file an appeal, of this decision. The parties intend that the amount be paid through the judgment fund, pursuant to law, 31 U.S.C. § 1304; 41 U.S.C. § 7108 (previously § 612).

Decision

The Board GRANTS the appeal. The contractor shall recover $414,383 plus interest from March 23, 2011.

JOSEPH A. VERGILIO

Board Judge

We concur:

ANTHONY S. BORWICK

Board Judge

ALLAN H. GOODMAN

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Caddell Construction Co., Inc., CBCA 1809. 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.