Opinion

Hill Dredging Corp.

  • 175 Ct. Cl. 883
  • 1966 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 241
  • 1966 WL 1535
Court
United States Court of Claims
Filed
Apr 1, 1966
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.6%

The opinion

Contracts; disfutes; administrative remedies, exhaustion of. — Plaintiff sues to recover on its contract for dredging work for the Corps of Engineers claiming that it encountered subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site of the Avork which were not anticipated, that its claim for additional costs incurred was denied by the contracting officer, *884 and, on appeal, by the Corps of Engineers Board of Contract Appeals. Defendant has moved for summary judgment dismissing the petition on the ground that plaintiff has failed to exhaust its administrative remedy of appeal to the head of the department (the Secretary) in accordance with the Disputes clause of the contract. Upon consideration thereof, together with the opposition thereto, and without oral argument and on the basis of Henry E. Wile Co. v. United States, 144 Ct. Cl. 394 , 169 F. Supp. 249 (1959), the court concluded that plaintiff had failed to exhaust its administrative remedies and on April 1, 1966, ordered that defendant’s motion be granted and the petition be dismissed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.