Howard v. Wear

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• denying the parties’ motions for summary judgment where, as here, the surety only “obliquely” addressed in its briefing a claim that the government breached a payment provision in a contract modification
• “The Government cannot forward the theory that it has discharged its duty under the contract, thereby depriving the Court of Federal Claims of jurisdiction, when it has ... performed] acts which render it a stakeholder.”
• surety’s subrogation claim was not limited to last of three progress payments made to a defaulting contractor on ground that surety did not begin to finance performance until after the first two payments had been made
• making this observation on remand

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).