Darwin Construction Company, Inc. v. United States

811 F.2d 593 (1987)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Darwin Construction Company, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
811 F.2d 593 (1987)

  • Written by Liz Nakamura, JD

Facts

Darwin Construction Company, Inc. (Darwin) (plaintiff) entered into a fixed-price contract with the United States Navy (defendant) to make improvements to a propellant machinery facility. The contract performance deadline was November 15, 1983. Because the facility was in active use, Darwin was allocated two 14-day blocks in which to complete the contract work. However, because of delays in materials and equipment deliveries, and delayed Naval approval of those deliveries, Darwin was only able to complete 65 percent of the contract work by the November 15 deadline. The Navy issued a show-cause notice informing Darwin that it faced default termination. In response, Darwin stated that it was financially and physically ready to complete performance and offered to complete the work in December, estimating it would take an additional four days. The Navy rejected Darwin’s offer and terminated Darwin’s contract for default, citing Darwin’s failure to meet the contract deadline and stating that further access to the facility could not be granted until August 1984. Darwin appealed to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (Board), arguing that the default termination was an abuse of the Navy’s discretion and that it should therefore be converted into a termination for the convenience of the government (convenience termination). Although the Board originally converted the default termination into a convenience termination, upon the government’s motion for reconsideration, the Board upheld the default termination because Darwin failed to prove the Navy issued the default termination in bad faith.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Cowen, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership