Bowers Investment Co. v. United States
104 Fed. Cl. 246
Fed. Cl.2011Background
- Bowers Investment Co., LLC leased office/warehouse space to FAA in Alaska in 1993, with rent due monthly in arrears beginning Jan 1994.
- The lease was amended and extended through 2006; rent terms changed in 1998 to a higher monthly amount.
- Plaintiff later filed contract claims with the FAA contracting officer seeking unpaid and underpaid rent after the lease expired; the CO denied these claims.
- Plaintiff appealed the denial first to the CBCA (Sept. 2006 claim) and then submitted two later claims (nonpayment and underpayment) to the CO (Nov. 25, 2009).
- CBCA previously addressed whether the FAA failed to pay the first three months of the lease and favorable CBCA findings were issued before the current suit.
- Plaintiff filed suit in October 2010 seeking relief on the nonpayment and underpayment claims; the FAA moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Election doctrine applicability to the nonpayment claim | Nonpayment claim is separate from the Sept. 2006 CBCA claim | Nonpayment claim is based on same facts as the Sept. 2006 claim and barred by election doctrine | Election doctrine does not bar the nonpayment claim |
| Whether the underpayment claim is barred by claim preclusion | Underpayment claim arises from different months and facts, not precluded | Underpayment claim shares transactional facts with CBCA decision and is barred | Underpayment claim barred by claim preclusion |
| Whether the complaint should be dismissed overall under Rule 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(6) | Court has jurisdiction to hear the present claims | Claims are barred by election doctrine and/or claim preclusion | Complaint dismissed under 12(b)(6) for claim preclusion; election doctrine not a bar to nonpayment |
Key Cases Cited
- Nat’l Neighbors, Inc. v. United States, 839 F.2d 1539 (Fed.Cir.1988) (binding election doctrine in CDA context; forum choice is final)
- Placeway Constr. Corp. v. United States, 920 F.2d 903 (Fed.Cir.1990) (multiple claims may arise from a single contract; forum election may preclude others)
- BRC Lease Co. v. United States, 93 Fed.Cl. 67 (2010) (two claims may be separate/distinct; election doctrine not always apply to all claims)
- Phillips/May Corp. v. United States, 524 F.3d 1264 (Fed.Cir.2008) (claims under single contract generally must be brought together; res judicata applies across related claims)
- Brown v. United States, 442 U.S. 127 (1979) (concept of claim preclusion and finality of judgments)
- Kunz Constr. Co. v. United States, 12 Cl.Ct. 74 (1987) (context for modified claims and jurisdiction under preclusion theories)
- Jo-Mar Corp. v. United States, 15 Cl.Ct. 602 (1988) (election doctrine and forum considerations in CDA claims)