CBCA 4539, 4545

Grunley Construction Co., Inc.

Mar 24, 2017Judge DanielsGENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
DecisionGranted in part

Key Facts

Appellant
Grunley Construction Co., Inc.
Respondent agency
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Judge
Daniels
Case number
CBCA 4539, 4545This cell names 2 dockets: 4539, 4545.
Decided
Mar 24, 2017The decision states Mar 24, 2017 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Decision
Law firm for the appellant
Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton Washington
Outcome
Granted in part
The 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
Lawrence M. Prosen and Daniel P. Broderick
Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton Washington
For the respondent
Jay N. Bernstein and Kristi Singleton
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, 2,152 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Mar 24, 2017 on its own faceRespondent GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

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

Contract Disputes Act1

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: March 24, 2017

CBCA 4539, 4545

GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.,

Appellant,

v.

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,

Respondent.

Lawrence M. Prosen and Daniel P. Broderick of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton

LLP, Washington, DC, 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.

Jay N. Bernstein and Kristi Singleton, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), ZISCHKAU, and O’ROURKE.

DANIELS, Board Judge.

Under a contract with the General Services Administration, Grunley Construction Co., Inc. modernized the Mary E. Switzer Building in Washington, D.C. The scope of work included the removal of hazardous material, including asbestos abatement, from the building. Disputes about this aspect of the job led to two claims which were placed before the Board in appeals of deemed denials by a contracting officer. One claim, known as the wage rate claim, was in the amount of $320,964; the appeal involving this claim was docketed as CBCA 4539. The other claim, known as the additional asbestos claim, was in the amount of $2,104,068; the appeal involving this claim was docketed as CBCA 4545.

The parties have filed a joint motion for entry of final judgment, in which they ask the Board to enter judgment in favor of the appellant in the two appeals, in the amount of $950,000. The parties have stipulated that a decision making such an award will fully and finally resolve all disputes, claims, counterclaims, and issues related to both appeals. The parties have also certified that they will not seek reconsideration or relief from judgment as to such a decision, and they will not appeal the decision.

Decision

The appeals are GRANTED IN PART. The General Services Administration shall pay to Grunley Construction Co., Inc. $950,000. This amount “shall be paid promptly in accordance with the procedures provided by section 1304 of title 31” of the United States Code. 41 U.S.C. § 7108(a) (2012).

_________________________

STEPHEN M. DANIELS

Board Judge

We concur:

JONATHAN D. ZISCHKAU

Board Judge

KATHLEEN J. O’ROURKE

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Grunley Construction Co., Inc., CBCA 4539, 4545. 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.