Our Firm’s objective is to get the job done using our experience and knowledge, either through settling the dispute before incurring expensive litigation costs, or if litigation becomes necessary, we have also been successful in getting clients’ cases resolved after conducting discovery, before an expensive trial. When a Government entity would not reach a settlement with our client, we have often been successful in obtaining a decision or verdict in the client's favor. The following are some examples of cases in which we were able to reach a settlement with the opposing party and rescue our clients from the disasters they faced:

• We represented a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business whose contract was halted for many years because of various changes to the plans and specifications. Our firm was able to claim that the contract was constructively terminated for convenience, which subsequently lead to a formal termination for convenience, enabling the contractor to be paid for his costs.
• We represented a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business regarding the construction of a large parking garage, which resulted in substantial damages. We were able to isolate the costs, and submit the proper claims, which resulted in a settlement with the Government.
• We represented an 8(a) contractor who suffered large overruns while performing a contract for underground storage sites. We were able to isolate the costs and submit the proper claims, which resulted in a settlement.
• We represented a small, upstate New York not-for-profit company employing a number of people with disabilities. This company had a contract to supply goods to the Government with several options. The Government elected to not exercise the last option, and the contractor was stuck with a massive amount of inventory. After investigation, it was found that the particular item being supplied was on a procurement list which mandated that the Government buy its product from this small business. A claim was filed and the Government settled the matter.
• Two Government contractor explosive manufacturers were defaulted based upon the Government's allegations that they could not meet the plans and specifications. Through discovery, we found out that the Government had relaxed the plans and specifications for the replacement contractor. Both cases were settled.
• An electronics manufacturer contacted us after its multi-million dollar contract was terminated for default, at which point over a million dollars’ worth of inventory was tied up. Upon investigation, it was further determined that the Government had supplied defective drawings and specifications. A request/claim was filed, and the contract was re-instated, along with an equitable adjustment.
• A client contacted us after he was unable to get any relief on a disastrous contract that he had with the Government of Pakistan that was largely funded by the U.S. Government. The company had spent a large sum of money on legal fees, but no comprehensive request for equitable adjustment had ever been submitted. We worked with the company to compile a large comprehensive request for equitable adjustment and obtained a settlement.
• A construction contractor in Buffalo, New York suffered substantial losses in a contract with the State. The State was taking the position that our client was delinquent in its performance. We made a request for documentation pursuant to the New York State Freedom of Information Law for all of the State’s files pertaining to the contract, and uncovered that the State either knew or should have known that the design was defective prior to the contact award. We then, with the help of the company, submitted a large claim and the matter was successfully resolved.
• An electronics manufacturer contacted us after its contract was terminated for convenience, with the manufacturer possessing a large amount of inventory sitting on its floor. The Government sought to bar the contractor from recovering its costs, asserting that since the contractor had not passed first article testing, the contractor should only be entitled to the cost of the first article. We successfully argued that the Government had waived the first article limitation clause, resulting in a settlement.
• We represented a client whose contract was terminated for default. While the Government and the contractor had an adversarial relationship, we agreed to participate in Alternate Dispute Resolution (“ADR”). The Government would only agree to ADR through what they call a mini-trial, with a binding decision from the ASBCA. Prior to the ADR proceeding, we were able to depose an ex-Government official, who admitted that the Government inspector was out to shut the contractor down. We made arrangements for the ex-Government official to travel to the hearing, and the matter settled prior to the commencement of the ADR.