Free Joint Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 39.5 kB
Pages: 2
Date: August 14, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 441 Words, 2,750 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/17949/54.pdf

Download Joint Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims ( 39.5 kB)


Preview Joint Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:04-cv-00805-CFL

Document 54

Filed 08/14/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS STATESMAN II APARTMENTS, INC., et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. )

Nos. 04-805C; 04-806C (consolidated) (Judge Lettow)

JOINT REPORT REGARDING DAMAGES Pursuant to the Court's June 29, 2006 Opinion and Order, plaintiffs, Statesman II Apartments, Inc., and Beach House Development Company, and defendant, the United States, respectfully submit the following joint report regarding damages: The Court's June 29, 2006 Opinion and Order directs that "[t]he parties shall calculate damages in accordance with the instructions set out [in the Opinion and Order]" and file a report with the Court on or before August 15, 2006, "providing the results of their calculations." Slip op. at 12. The damages for plaintiff Statesman II Apartments, Inc., calculated by the parties in accordance with the Court's instructions, are as follows: Section 8 rent subsidy: $31,756 Market rent survey costs: 3,000 Total Damages: $34,756 The damages for plaintiff Beach House Development Company, calculated by the parties in accordance with the Court's instructions, are as follows: Section 8 rent subsidy: $ 0 Market rent survey costs: 3,000 Total Damages: $ 3,000

Case 1:04-cv-00805-CFL

Document 54

Filed 08/14/2006

Page 2 of 2

The Court's June 29, 2006 Opinion and Order also directs that "the parties shall address interest due under Section 12 of the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 611." Slip op. at 12. Plaintiffs and defendant respectfully state that the Contract Disputes Act (CDA) does not apply to plaintiffs' Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contracts because the HAP contracts are not the kind of contract to which the CDA applies.1/ Therefore, plaintiffs are not entitled to an award of interest under 41 U.S.C. § 611. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/Fred J. Livingstone FRED J. LIVINGSTONE, ESQ. Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP 3500 BP Tower 200 Public Square Cleveland, OH 44114-2302 Tele: (216) 241-2838 (fax)(216) 241-3707 Attorney for Plaintiffs Of Counsel: Mark J. Valponi Majeed G. Makhlouf Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP AUGUST 14, 2006 s/John E. Kosloske JOHN E. KOSLOSKE Senior Trial Counsel Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 1100 L Street, N.W., Room 8012 Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 307-0282 (fax)(202) 514-8624 Attorneys for Defendant

See 41 U.S.C. § 602(a) (2000); Blanco-Mora Enterprises, Inc., HUD BCA No. 94-G-136C5, 94-3 BCA ¶ 26,974; Kurtis R. Mayer and Pamela Mayer, d.b.a. Mayer Built Homes, HUD BCA No. 83-823-C20, 84-2 BCA ¶ 17,494. -2-

1