ASBCA Holds that Transmission Emails are "Part of the Same Transaction" as Mods for Plain Meaning Purposes
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.24.19
Can contractors reserve rights in a transmission email while executing a contract modification that is silent on such reservation? The ASBCA recently affirmed again that yes, contractors can. In NMS Management, Inc., ASBCA No. 61519 (Apr. 11, 2019), a dispute over the “improper attempt at a partial exercise” of an option period, the ASBCA rejected the Government’s argument that NMS was strictly bound by the terms of a signed bilateral modification – viewed in isolation – because NMS’s accompanying transmission email stated that it was signing under protest. The ASBCA clarified the plain meaning rule by citing precedent that the “interpretation of a contract as a whole requires consideration of all documents that are part of the same transaction together.” The Board held that “the [transmission] email dispels any notion that Modification No. P00011 is the only writing to consider when evaluating the legal consequences of the modification.”
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.10.26
In Appeal of Bahadir (a C&M case), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied the government’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, ruling in favor of the contractor on both key issues raised by the government. The case arises from a contract for construction work at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, under which Appellant alleged government-caused delay and filed certified prolongation claims using a “windows analysis” methodology. The government moved to dismiss, arguing that Appellant failed to state a sum certain for each of what the government characterized as 38 distinct claims, and separately that four claims had not been properly presented to the Contracting Officer.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.10.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.07.26
Missouri AG Sues Kansas City Over Race- and Sex-Based Contracting Program
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.06.26
