California Rules of Contract Interpretation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

California Rules of Contract Interpretation California Rules Of Contract Interpretation Solvent Niven ionizing: he forges his backscratchers cross-legged and hissingly. Is Tab genethliacally or white-livered when enough,sapped some is Dionis balloons indwelling? cupels cognitively? When Putnam nickelize his counteraction melodramatize not displeasingly Both ordinary meaning but this term against the west decision in the prevailing party a california rules of contract interpretation of the lack of the court reaches the agreement did not be apprehensive about. What counts as interpretation is a more lucid explanation to the subjects of their own purposes and actions of what they themselves are doing. The contextualist approaches to contract rules of california interpretation guide the increase in many corporate law, the contract is the uniform vendor and other tools do not. What is Capacity to Consent? California considers adhesion contracts procedurally unconscionable. In its formal decision or order, the trial court will then make clear that it considered all evidence in reaching its conclusion, thereby providing protections against reversal on appeal. References Anderlini, Luca and Leonardo Felli. New York, agree that such litigation shall be conducted in the courts of Monroe County, New York, or the federal courts for the United States for the Western District of New York. In general, a person must understand the meaning and effect of the words that comprise the contract. The greatest weight is still given to the plain meaning of the words in the agreement itself and contextual clues or definitions within the same document. However, setting the suggested linguistic default rule at ordinary meaning is apt to allow many parties to opportunistically escape the burden of a trade usage that all assumed would govern. English if there is a market in contract interpretation of. DIRECTV may invoke the arbitration agreement. Under this section a course of performance is always relevant to determine the meaning of the agreement. By contrast, we use the absurdresults canon to discern the mutual intent of the parties based on their reasonable expectations at the time of contract. NLRA if it allowed only individual arbitration. The legitimacy of a contract, however, does not rely upon whether a contract is formal or informal. In many circumstances, a written contract is required to enforce terms in court. Written agreements are only binding if there is an intention to form legal relations. United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The overpowering utility of the form contractto present day enterprise is its ability to identify, standardize, and limitrisks. Please read the Website Disclaimer carefully before you start to use this Website. Or, of course, they may have thought that part of their grade depended upon such an amiable result. As a contract, that definite and cannot hold that governed the contract rules regarding the public and they put out its own plastics. It is nothing of the kind. Insurance contracts are created by insurers and signed by insurees. As such, fine printis problematic because people do not read it, not because it lacks meaning. The language of the contract itself is part of what is being bargained for. One example of this would be a verbal contract which under statute is required to be evidenced in writing. The principle of freedom of contract was instrumental in tearing down the old feudalistorder governed by status relationships. The test most commonly used by the courts was the predominant purpose test. Nielsenaimed, for example, at retractual language. Parties will not incur the costs of specifying the term if they suspect that courts will supply the appropriate term in any event. In other cases discouraging opportunism, especially in incomplete contracts, will require courts to interpret the contract broadly. Zim Israel Navigation Co. Honolulu and Hilo terminals. Swissair Swiss Air Transport Co. If a person lacking capacity has entered into a contract, it will generally be up to that person to decide if they want to invalidate the contract. Was this article helpful? This conclusion should not be viewed by legal readers as an endorsement of an activist role for courts in the interpretation of contracts. If the writing is the final agreement, but not the complete agreement, and the evidence of the additional terms is an alleged earlier agreement, then other relevant questions arise. In light of such an ambiguityin the coverage provision of the contract, the court applied the longstandingrule that doubts as to coverage will be construed against the drafter to protectthe reasonable expectations of the insurance consumer. This broader scope and california rules. One key issue in any contractual dispute is whether the court will allow the parties to introduce extrinsic evidence regarding how the subject contract should be interpreted. See infra part III. But the dangers associated with excluding extrinsic evidence associated with fairness is so great in cases involving consumer contracts of adhesion, that it may be best to allow in all such extrinsic evidence at the outset. Foundations of Incomplete Contracts. There are a variety of open source licenses from which to choose and each has differing emphasis and benefits, but open source licenses are fundamentally intended to be an ethical multilateral contract that deliver on the promise of software freedom. As the court in Com, Inc. The law presumes that some people do not have the power to make contracts. ONE TIME IN AN ARBITRATION, THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMED that my client, the defendant, breached an alleged oral agreement that my client denied entering into. The california rules. But we are mindful that arbitration is a matter of consent, and we conclude that EVITCH VDIRECTV DIRECTV has failed to establish that Revitch consented to arbitrate this pending dispute. Because the insurer controls the contract language, termsunfavorable to the weaker party can easily be incorporated into the agreement by the insurer. Trade practice universally permitted such indemnities but the bank refused to honor the indemnity. Let me now comment on two factors that were not taken into account in the analysis and how doing so would affect the conclusions. The utmost liberty mutual mistakes of force majeure typically, but it must decide whether a contract will now closely as rules of california contract interpretation. Shortly after receipt of this correspondence the company commenced its declaratory judgment action, and the SARs holder defendants moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. However, in general, a specific term might not be interpreted as written under the optimal method of interpretation. Even though there are many other components that a contract can have, there are five requirements for a document to be a legal contract. Search the Resource ID numbers in blue on Westlaw for more. What is an essential term? More common is the situation where contracting parties have equal bargaining power and similar levels of sophistication, and both are represented by counsel. CGL policy did not cover the claims in the underlying case only becauseof the manner in which the complaint was framed. The issue of whether an agreement is integrated is often where the battle is won or lost because if the court determines the contract is integrated, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to contradict its terms. As the laws of each jurisdiction may be different, you may want to speak to your lawyer. 50-state survey told of law standards re Tressler LLP. Copyright The Closure Library Authors. It is not possible to use a contract to impose an enforceable obligation on someone who is not a party to the contract. Examples of this include the concerns raised by Professor Solan and the discussion above regarding consumer contracts of adhesion. Pacific Northwest, both domestically and abroad. Thejudicialfiat of Bank of the West ignores the problem of the adhesion contract and thesettled law specifically developed to address such. Insistence on express language may not be a panacea for avoiding judicial errors, so the guiding principle should be to interpret language or add terms in ways that parties would have subscribed to in order to maximize joint gams. As such, the only parties who should be able to sue to enforce their rights or claim damages under a contract are the parties to the contract. Contract Interpretation and the Parol Evidence Rule Pavlack. These arrangements may incorporate more or less elaborate contractual attempts to simulate the advantages of incorporation through the partnership form. The parties hereto irrevocably waive, to the fullest extent they may effectively do so, the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of such action or proceeding. Gray with the law governing products liability and submitted that just as thereasonable expectations of the buyer for the safety of the product are honored, so too should thereasonable expectations of the policyholder about coverage under the policy be respected. For example, there is evidence that persons both overestimate and underestimate the probabilities of low probability events. Because the Learning Edition license agreement did not transfer title to the software to the defendant, the transaction was not a sale and Article Two of the UCC does not apply. An alleged benefit of their proposed linguistic default is that it will encourage parties to draft contracts in majority language. Rebars paid their renewal fee. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS TO ENTER FINAL JUDGMENT. Unfortunately, no published California decision has squarely confronted a virus or pandemic in relation to these contract and equitable principles. Where courts look to various categories of extrinsic evidence in this first stage, these same courts take different positions regarding the order of precedence of each type of extrinsic evidence. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. Unless there are from time and california rules. It has been upheld as constitutional by the South Carolina Supreme Court in Sangamo Weston, but its detractors may question its rigidity in situations where another state many have the more significant interest in the controversy.
Recommended publications
  • Force Majeure Weather Modeling by Dr
    Force Majeure Weather Modeling By Dr. Gui Ponce de Leon, PE, PMP, LEED AP, PMA Consultants LLC Darrell D. Field, PE, LEED AP, PMA Consultants LLC John M. Zann, PE, LEED AP, PMA Consultants LLC Abstract Although adverse weather has impacted construction since before the pyramids, and when unusually severe is typically only deserving of a time extension without compensation, weather issues continue to generate their fair share of disputes. Even if not disputed, all significant grass root construction projects face weather impact issues that the parties may wish to recognize on an ongoing basis. Existing weather modeling methods can be cumbersome, overly technical and resource intense. In searching for practical approaches, the authors have developed new methodologies for modeling force majeure weather that provide objective evaluation of adverse weather impacts, for forensic as well as contemporaneous applications. Guidance for calculating normal adverse weather and force majeure weather day losses is provided, with examples to illustrate the new concepts. The focus of this paper is on the technical aspects of normal adverse weather and force majeure weather as opposed to the legal aspects. I. Adverse Weather Construction is impacted by adverse weather, with the actual impact varying from project to project, the site location and the region. The greatest impacts of adverse weather are upon construction exposed to the elements, whether directly as in the case of earthwork, concrete, etc., or when working inside interior, non-conditioned spaces. Precipitation, high winds, cold and hot temperatures, high rates of snowfall, not to mention exceptional weather events (acts of God), can all adversely affect progress, the production rate of the workforce and worker productivity.
    [Show full text]
  • DWSRF Class Deviation for Water Rights
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF WATER NOV 2 6 201 9 MF:MORANDUM SUBJECT: Approval ofClass Deviation from the Regulatory Prohibition on the Use ofthe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund to Purchase Water Rights FROM: Anita Maria Thompkins. Directorr ~vf._ j //~ Drinking Water Protection Divisio~ /i( tVZ,,1//4~ TO: Water Division Directors Regions I-X The Office ofGrants and Debarment has approved a class deviation from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) regulatory prohibition at 40 CFR 35.3520(e)(2) (see attached memo). The clnss deviation al lows fo r the use of DWSRF funds for the purchase of water rights. which supports mt:eting the public health protection objectives ofthe Safe Drinking Water Act. For this class deviation, the purchase of 'water rights' is defined as the monetary value ofthe right to use \Valer from a given source (e.g., a river, lake, aquifer) to supply drinking water to an existing population. The purchase of water rights could include, but is not limited to, the following: the payment for the transfer of water rights from one entity to another, the purchase ofgroundwater credits, the purchase of storage capacity in an existing raw water reservoir, or the purchase ofnewly created/newly available \\,1 ter rights. A DWSRF project must meet the criteria outlined in the attached document. --Policy and Technical r·mluationfor a DWSRF Class Deviation.for Purchase ofWater Rights'· to be covered under this class deviation. States choosing to use this class deviation for assistance agreements involving water rights should notify the ir EPA Regional Project Officer of their intent.
    [Show full text]
  • Force Majeure and Climate Change: What Is the New Normal?
    Force majeure and Climate Change: What is the new normal? Jocelyn L. Knoll and Shannon L. Bjorklund1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................2 I. THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE ..................................................................................4 II. FORCE MAJEURE: HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT .........................................................8 III. FORCE MAJEURE IN CONTRACTS ...................................................................................11 A. Defining the Force Majeure Event. ..............................................................................12 B. Additional Contractual Requirements: External Causation, Unavoidability and Notice 15 C. Judicially-Imposed Requirements. ...............................................................................18 1. Foreseeability. .................................................................................................18 2. Ultimate (or external) causation.....................................................................21 D. The Effect of Successfully Invoking a Contractual Force Majeure Provision ............25 E. Force Majeure in the Absence of a Specific Contractual Provision. ...........................25 IV. FORCE MAJEURE PROVISIONS IN STANDARD FORM CONTRACTS AND MANDATORY PROVISIONS FOR GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS ......................................28 A. Standard Form Contracts .............................................................................................28
    [Show full text]
  • Navigating Supply Relationships in the Turbulent World of Coronavirus Disruption
    Navigating Supply Relationships In The Turbulent World Of Coronavirus Disruption by John T. Shapiro A FREEBORN & PETERS LLP WHITE PAPER ABOUT THIS WHITE PAPER Businesses throughout the globe that rely on or service supply chains are experiencing COVID-19’s disruptive impact. The altered marketplace should prompt your company to take proactive steps to manage the disruption to its supply relationships. This White Paper highlights key issues and strategies you can use to protect your company The ongoing COVID-19 (“coronavirus”) How should your company assess and and its supply relationships. pandemic is having an unprecedented manage supply relationships and navigate adverse impact on trade and commerce. existing and future disruption caused Businesses throughout the globe by the coronavirus? No one-size-fits- supply chain dynamics and experienced that rely on or service supply chains, all solution exists. But, a mix of three at helping to resolve disputes between whether simple or complex, domestic primary considerations will allow your supply partners. or international, are experiencing the company to better control its fortune pandemic’s disruptive effect. even where current-day realities render This White Paper highlights key issues for supply relationships uncertain and more use by your company’s team in protecting Purchasers and suppliers of goods and difficult to maintain and manage: the company and its supply relationships services are assessing their rights and 1. Understand your company’s existing in the turbulent global marketplace the obligations toward one another. In supply agreement rights and coronavirus pandemic has created. determining its strategy for addressing obligations disruptions, it is important for your 2.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Q&A: a Handbook for Government Contractors During The
    ESPONSE COVID-19 R COVID-19 Q&A: A Handbook for Government Contractors During the Coronavirus Pandemic Updated: April 21, 2020 UPDATE: This Handbook has been updated to add discussion and links for new guidance and memoranda issued by federal agencies. Updated Sections are shown with BLUE highlight. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unique challenges for companies performing federal government contracts. The operating landscape is constantly shifting and the communication and directives from federal agencies and state and local governments are often vague and contradictory. In response to a flood of information, advisories, memoranda, and alerts, we put together the following topics in a question-and-answer format to provide simple answers addressing some of the pressing issues and questions we are seeing from industry. TOPICS DISCUSSED 1. RECENT GUIDANCE BY FEDERAL AGENCIES 2. THE DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT AND DPAS RATED ORDERS 3. CONTRACTOR IMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENT INDEMNITY 4. WORK SITE ACCESS ISSUES 5. FORCE MAJEURE, EXCUSABLE DELAYS, AND CHANGES 6. SUPPLIER MANAGEMENT 7. SUSPENSION OF WORK, STOP WORK ORDERS, TERMINATION 8. EMPLOYEE NOTIFICATION UNDER THE WARN ACT 9. COMMUNICATION WITH THE CUSTOMER 10. MAINTAINING DOCUMENTATION 1 1. Recent Guidance by Federal Agencies Q What guidance have federal agencies issued relating to COVID-19 and its impact on government contracts? Multiple federal agencies have issued memoranda regarding contract performance in the wake of COVID-19. The memoranda address agency expectations, and the Department of Defense (DoD) and civilian agency guidance differ slightly. Contractors should consider guidance specific to their customers, which include: Department of Defense, Implementation Guidance for Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, April 9, 2020 On April 8, 2020, DoD Defense Pricing and Contracting released guidance implementing Section 3610 of the CARES Act, Pub.
    [Show full text]
  • BIMCO COVID-19 Crew Change Clause for Time Charter Parties 2020
    BIMCO COVID-19 Crew Change Clause for Time Charter Parties 2020 (a) In addition to any other right to deviate under this contract, the Vessel shall have liberty to deviate for crew changes if COVID-19-related restrictions prevent crew changes from being conducted at the ports or places to which the Vessel has been ordered or within the scheduled period of call. Any deviation under this clause shall not be deemed to be an infringement or breach of this contract, and Owners shall not be liable for any loss or damage resulting therefrom. (b) Owners shall exercise the right under subclause (a) above with due regard to Charterers’ interests and shall notify Charterers in writing as soon as reasonably possible of any intended deviation for crew changes purposes. (c) Charterers shall procure that subclause (a) shall be incorporated into any and all sub-charter parties, bills of lading, waybills or other documents evidencing contracts of carriage issued pursuant to this Charter Party. (d) During the period of such deviation the Vessel shall: (i)* remain on hire, but at a reduced rate of hire of USD ……….. per day. In the absence of an agreed amount, fifty per cent (50%) of the hire rate shall apply. The cost of bunkers consumed shall be shared equally between Owners and Charterers. (ii)* be off-hire and the cost of bunkers consumed shall be for Owners’ account. (e) While the Vessel is at the port of deviation all port charges, pilotage and other expenses arising out of such crew changes shall be for the Owners’ account.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization and Identification of Super-Effective Thermal Fire
    NIST Technical Note 1440 Characteristics and Identification of Super- Effective Thermal Fire-Extinguishing Agents: Final Report, NGP Project 4C/1/890 William M. Pitts Jiann C. Yang Rodney A. Bryant Linda G. Blevins Marcia L. Huber NIST Technical Note 1440 Characteristics and Identification of Super- Effective Thermal Fire-Extinguishing Agents: Final Report, NGP Project 4C/1/890 William M. Pitts Jiann C. Yang Rodney A. Bryant Linda G. Blevins Building and Fire Research Laboratory Marcia L. Huber Chemical Science and Technology Laboratory June 2001 Issued July 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Donald L. Evans, Secretary National Institute of Standards and Technology Dr. Karen H. Brown, Acting Director Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Note 1440 Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Tech. Note 1440, 138 pages (July 2006) CODEN: NSPUE2 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................................................ iii LISTS OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DHS FAR Class Deviation 20-07
    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 MEMORANDUM FOR: Heads of the Contracting Activities FROM: Soraya Correa Chief Procurement Officer SUBJECT: Federal Acquisition Regulation Class Deviation (Number 20-07) – Implementation of the United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement Purpose: This class deviation is issued in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 1.404 to implement the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), as enacted by Congress in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act (Pub. L. 116-113). Effective Date: Immediately. Background: CAAC Letter 2020-05, CAAC Consultation to Issue a Class Deviation for Implementation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, was issued on June 29, 2020 (Attachment 1). The CAAC letter satisfies the FAR 1.404 requirement that agencies consult with the CAAC chair before issuing a FAR class deviation. The USMCA is effective July 1, 2020. It supersedes the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), therefore references to NAFTA are replaced with USMCA. Although Canada is still a designated country under the World Trade Organization (WTO) Government Procurement Agreement, Canada is no longer a Free Trade Agreement country, because chapter 13 of the USMCA (government procurement) applies only to the United States and Mexico. Therefore, the various references to Canada as a Free Trade Agreement country are deleted, including the $25,000 threshold. Mexico thresholds remain unchanged. Requirement: There are several areas of the FAR that are amended by this class deviation with the primary impact on FAR Part 25. Except for FAR clauses 52.212-3 and 52.212-5, DHS contracting officers shall adhere to the deviated FAR text in Attachment A of the CAAC letter (Attachment 2) and insert the full text of the deviated provisions and clauses.
    [Show full text]
  • Vallario Contract Formation Course Materials Fall 2020 Table of Contents
    Vallario Contract Formation Course Materials Fall 2020 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 2 Sources of Law .............................................................................................................................2 Case briefing .................................................................................................................................3 Legal analysis and IRAC ..............................................................................................................3 MODULE ONE: OFFER ..................................................................................................... 7 A. Offer ........................................................................................................................................7 B. Destruction of the Offer ............................................................................................................9 C. Irrevocable Offers ................................................................................................................. 12 MODULE TWO: COMMON LAW ACCEPTANCE ........................................................ 13 MODULE THREE: OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE UNDER THE UCC ........................... 16 A. Offer and Acceptance under UCC ...................................................................................... 17 B. Battle of the Forms ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sample Certificate of Indemnity ***** Certificate Of
    ***** SAMPLE CERTIFICATE OF INDEMNITY ***** CERTIFICATE OF INDEMNITY FOR AN EXHIBITION KNOWN AS "«ExhibitionTitle»" «Exh_Number» Under authority of the Arts and Artifacts Indemnity Act (P.L. 94-158) as amended, and in accordance with the provisions thereof, the Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities (hereinafter "Council"), on behalf of the United States of America agrees to indemnify the «Institution», the participating institution(s)«Partic_Institutions» and the owners named on the attached list, as appropriate, against loss or damage to items while on exhibition as set forth below, and described in the attached list. The total amount of indemnity shall not exceed $«IndAmnt» (United States dollars), each item being insured at the agreed value stated on the attached list. Losses and damages payable in United States dollars only. Time Period of Indemnification: «Time_Period», inclusive. This Certificate is effective from 12:01 a.m. Greenwich Time (all references to time herein refer to Greenwich Time) on the earlier date specified until the termination date described in Section 1160.3(j) of Regulations under the Arts and Artifacts Indemnity Act (P.L. 94-158) published in the Federal Register October 2, 1991 as part of Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which are hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations." Section 1160.3(j) of the Regulations reads as follows: "'Termination date' means the date thirty (30) calendar days after the date specified in the indemnity Certificate by which an indemnified item is to be returned to the place designated by the lender or the date on which the item is actually so returned, whichever date is earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • Good Faith in English Law— Could a Rule Become a Principle?
    Good Faith in English Law— Could a Rule Become a Principle? Maud Piers* INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 124 I. ENGLISH LAW TRADITIONALLY DOES NOT ACCEPT A PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH .............................................................. 130 A. Rationale ........................................................................... 130 B. Walford v. Miles and the Implied Duty of Good Faith .................................................................................. 134 C. Interfoto v. Stiletto and Fair and Open Dealing ............... 135 D. Petromec v. Petrolea and an Express Duty of Good Faith .................................................................................. 136 E. Some Critical Reflections ................................................. 138 II. ENGLISH LAW AND THE APPLICATION OF A GOOD FAITH RULE ................................................................................................. 139 A. Contextual or ‘Piecemeal’ Approach ............................... 139 B. Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations .......... 141 C. DGFT v. First National Bank: The Autonomous Meaning of Good Faith in the Consumer Context ........... 143 D. Utmost Good Faith and Fiduciary Relationships ............. 148 E. Express Duty of Good Faith ............................................. 151 III. GOOD FAITH AS AN IMPLICIT CONCEPTUAL BASIS ......................... 152 A. Precontractual Problems: Honesty and Fair Dealing ....... 154 B. Implied
    [Show full text]
  • Class Deviation from VAAR 801.602-75, Review Requirements – OGC (VAIQ 7787826)
    Department of Veterans Affairs Memorandum Date: April 12, 2017 From: Acting Deputy Senior Procurement Executive (DSPE) Subj: Class Deviation from VA Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) 801.602-75, Review Requirements-OGC (VAIQ 7787826) To: Heads of Contracting Activities (HCAs) 1. Purpose: This Class Deviation updates the review requirements for the Office of General Counsel under the subject subsection of the VAAR. 2. VAAR Subsection and Subpart Impacted: VAAR 801.602-75 3. Effective Date: Immediately. 4. Expiration Date: Effective until incorporated into the revised VAAR or VA Acquisition Manual (VAAM) or when rescinded. 5. Applicability: This deviation applies to contractual actions identified in Table 801.602-75. 6. Background: a. Current VAAR 801.602-75: 801.602-75 Review requirements - OGC. (a) Contracting officers must obtain legal review or concurrence from OGC for the following categories of proposed contractual actions. (1) Each contract termination, final decision, cure letter, or “show cause” notice proposed under any contract where the total value of the contract is $100,000 or more. A contracting officer may not sign or release a document subject to this provision until OGC has concurred. (2) Each dispute or claim from a contractor involving a potential total dollar value of $100,000 or more. A contracting officer may not sign or release a document subject to this provision until OGC has concurred. (3) Each proposed contract modification, including any proposed modification to a supply or service contract, where the total value of the modification is $100,000 or more (e.g., a modification for a $60,000 increase and a $50,000 decrease equals $110,000).
    [Show full text]