CBCA 7714, 7715, 7716

Mercer Fraser Company

Apr 18, 2023Judge LesterDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DismissalSettled

Key Facts

Appellant
Mercer Fraser Company
Respondent agency
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Judge
Lester
Case number
CBCA 7714, 7715, 7716This cell names 3 dockets: 7714, 7715, 7716.
Decided
Apr 18, 2023The decision states Apr 18, 2023 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Dismissal
Law firm for the appellant
Rogers Joseph O’Donnell, PC
Outcome
Settled
Based upon the parties' agreement, the petition referencing the three claims, which was docketed separately for each claim and then consolidated, is DISMISSED.
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
Richard M. Harris and Neil H. O’Donnell
Rogers Joseph O’Donnell, PC
San Francisco, CA
For the respondent
Jack F. Gilbert
Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation
Lakewood, CO
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, 2,561 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Apr 18, 2023 on its own faceRespondent DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 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.

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.

DISMISSED: April 18, 2023

CBCA 7714, 7715, 7716

MERCER FRASER COMPANY,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,

Respondent.

Richard M. Harris and Neil H. O’Donnell of Rogers Joseph O’Donnell, PC, San

Francisco, CA, counsel for Petitioner.

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.

Jack F. Gilbert, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, Lakewood, CO, counsel for Respondent.

LESTER, Board Judge.

Order

On March 17, 2023, Mercer Fraser Company (MFC) filed a petition with the Board under section 7103(f)(4) of the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C. § 7103(f)(4) (2018), requesting that we order the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) contracting officer to expedite issuance of decisions on three separate certified claims that MFC submitted seeking monetary relief under a contract for highway repair work. The FHWA contracting officer received two of the three claims at issue on October 28, 2022, and the third on December 16, 2022. By letters dated December 28, 2022, and February 15, 2023, the FHWA, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. § 7103(f)(2)(B), notified MFC that decisions on the three claims would be issued by April 28, May 31, and October 31, 2023, respectively, instead of within sixty days after the contracting officer’s receipt of each claim. Because the petition involved three separate certified claims, the Clerk of the Board viewed the petition as dealing with three separate matters and assigned a separate docket number to each of the three claims. The Board, by order dated March 21, 2023, consolidated the three docket numbers. The parties have now filed what they have titled “Joint Agreement on Petitioner’s Requested Relief” in which they represent that they have resolved their disagreement about the deadlines for issuance of final decisions, and they ask the Board to memorialize their agreement in this order. Specifically, the FWHA has agreed, with MFC’s approval, that the contracting officer will issue a consolidated final decision addressing all three claims no later than May 31, 2023. The parties have also agreed that, if MFC has any other related claims stemming out of the contract, MFC will submit them as quickly as possible with the hope that the FHWA contracting officer can address them in his May 31, 2023, decision. The parties also agree to address any future claims as expeditiously as possible.

Based upon the parties’ agreement, the petition referencing the three claims, which was docketed separately for each claim and then consolidated, is DISMISSED.

Harold D. Lester, Jr.

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Mercer Fraser Company, CBCA 7714, 7715, 7716. 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.