CBCA 2392, 2765

Caddell Construction Co., Inc.

Apr 10, 2015Judge Drummond
DecisionGranted in partby agreement

Key Facts

Appellant
Caddell Construction Co., Inc.
Respondent agency
Read from the decision's own caption, and this one matches no measured caption shape or its text is not captured. The Board's listing names no agency at all.
Judge
Drummond
Case number
CBCA 2392, 2765This cell names 2 dockets: 2392, 2765.
Decided
Apr 10, 2015The decision states Apr 10, 2015 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Decision
Law firm for the appellant
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings
Outcome
Granted in partEntered by agreement of the parties.
Accordingly, 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

The topic rules ran over this decision's own words and none of them matched.

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 and Jonathan C. Cobb
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings
Birmingham, AL
For the respondent
Jay N. Bernstein and Lori Shapiro and Lesley M. Busch and Claire L. O’Donnell and John S. Tobey and Shana T. Vinson
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, 2,381 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Apr 10, 2015 on its own face Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

2 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
Agency FAR supplements1

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: April 10, 2015

CBCA 2392, 2765

CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.,

Appellant,

v.

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,

Agency.

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 and Jonathan C. Cobb of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP, Birmingham, AL, counsel for Appellant.

Jay N. Bernstein, Lori Shapiro, Lesley M. Busch, Claire L. O’Donnell, John S. Tobey, and Shana T. Vinson, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges STERN, POLLACK, and DRUMMOND.

DRUMMOND, Board Judge.

Order

In the above-referenced consolidated appeals, appellant, Caddell Construction Co., Inc. (Caddell) appealed decisions of a contracting officer of respondent, General Services Administration, arising from contract no. GS-07P-05-UEC-3003 (the Contract) for construction of the United States Courthouse in El Paso, Texas.

On March 31, 2015, the parties filed a joint motion for entry of final judgment. The parties request that the Board enter judgment for Caddell in these consolidated appeals in the total sum of $10,400,000, consisting of $10,215,519 to be paid from the judgment fund and the balance of $184,481 to be paid from the remaining contract funds.

In their joint motion, the parties reserve the following: (a) Caddell and the GSA reserve all claims, damages and remedies against each other arising from the breach of any of the obligations set forth in the Settlement Agreement.

(b) GSA reserves all claims, damages and remedies against Caddell for latent defects in the Contract work.

(c) GSA reserves its rights under any unexpired warranties applicable to the work performed by Caddell under the Contract.

The parties also agree in their joint motion that they will not seek reconsideration of or relief from this Board’s decision awarding judgement, and that they will not appeal the Board’s decision.

Decision

Accordingly, these appeals are GRANTED IN PART. Rule 256 (48 CFR 6101.25(b) (2014)). In accordance with parties’ joint stipulation, the Board awards the total of $10,400,000, with $10,215,519 to be paid from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. § 1304 (2012) and the balance of $184,481 to be paid from the remaining contract funds.

___________________________

JEROME M. DRUMMOND

Board Judge

We concur:

JAMES L. STERN

Board Judge

HOWARD A. POLLACK

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Caddell Construction Co., Inc., CBCA 2392, 2765. 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 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.