Instead, Grimberg was saddled with an additional fabrication cost of $34,500 beyond that which it had originally quoted" (494). Case name and citation

Ronald R. J Rhen, plaintiff v. The United States, defendant. No. 308-88C. United States Claims Court, 17 Cl. Ct. 140. June 2, 1989.

Key Facts

The plaintiff Rhen had been contracted to clear surplus trees and bushes by the Oregon government within a specified time frame of 6 months. Progress was slow and the plaintiff was asked to submit a revised work schedule. The time frame of the contract concluded and the work was not yet completed. The contracting officer found that the plaintiff had not met the required deadline and that the plaintiff's excuses were not acceptable grounds for extensions. Plaintiff Rhen filed suit for wrongful termination.

Legal Issue(s) Presented before Court

The plaintiff asks for the fee he or she was to be paid for the work, reimbursement the income he lost because of his inability...

The court concurred with this assessment. The work was not completed in a timely fashion, bearing out the defendant's interpretation of the work, and it was invalid that the government provided restitution for the contracts Rhen might have obtained, had he received bonding -- but these damages were deemed too "remote, consequential and speculative" as a rule of law (576). No thinning was done on the roadways, and the roadways were already deleted from the project scope, based upon the evidence (575).