Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS BANK ONE, MICHIGAN (formerly NBD BANK), Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
No. 01-325C (Judge Block)
DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CORRECT CLERICAL MISTAKE IN THE COURT'S OPINION AND JUDGMENT Pursuant to Rule 60(a) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, defendant, the United States, respectfully requests the Court to correct the Court's unpublished opinion and order in this case, dated July 31, 2003, and judgment, issued August 1, 2003, to properly reflect the amount due the United States by Bank One, in the amount of $93,297.50, plus interest. The re-issuance of a corrected opinion and judgment will not alter the outcome of the case or any of the substantive findings contained in the Court's original opinion. Counsel for plaintiff, Charles Milne, does not oppose this request. The Court's opinion and judgment reflect that judgment has been entered in favor of the United States in the erroneous amount of $93,277.00, plus interest. See Court's July 14, 2003 opinion ("opinion"), p. 9, and August 1, 2003 judgment ("judgment"). As indicated above, the correct amount due the United States should be in the amount of $93,297.50, plus interest.1 The The error in the amount reflected in the Court's opinion and judgment was likely a carryover of an an error contained in defendant's counterclaim filed against Bank One on May 8, 2002 (p. 9, ¶ 36). The counterclaim erroneously indicated that the total amount due the United States from the two checks mistakenly issued to Bank One totaled $97,277.50. The Court's opinion and order, p. 2, also reflect this same erroneous amount. In fact, the undisputed sum of the two checks at issue, check number 00599655 for $47,345.00 and check number 00599540 for $45,952.50, result in a total amount of $93,297.50.
Page 2 of 3
correct amount of $93,297.50 is indicated in the Court's opinion on p. 3, in a quote taken from an August 11, 2000 demand letter sent to Bank One from the Defense Financing and Accounting Service Columbus (DFAS CO). The correct amount due the United States ($93,297.50) is also reflected in the Government's motion for summary judgment, filed November 22, 2002, and in the Government's reply to plaintiff's answer to defendant's motion for summary judgment and defendant's response to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, filed February 7, 2003. Because the Department of the Army issued payment to John Johnson Co., the former plaintiff in this case, in the correct amount of $93,297.50 on or about May 15, 2002, and must re-pay that same amount to the source it was procured from, the Government seeks to have the Court's opinion and judgment corrected to reflect the actual total of $93,297.50 for the purpose of properly reimbursing these agency funds. For the foregoing reasons, the United States submits this unopposed motion requesting that the Court's opinion and judgment be technically corrected, as indicated above, to reflect the total amount due and owing the United States, in the amount of $93,297.50, plus interest. We apologize to the Court for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Page 3 of 3
Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director s/ FRANKLIN E. WHITE, JR. Assistant Director OF COUNSEL: PAUL VITRANO TACOM General Legal Division 6501 E. 11 Mile Road Warren, Michigan 48397-5000 CPT TIMOTHY RYAN U.S. Army Litigation Division 901 N. Stuart Street, Suite 700 Arlington, VA 22203 s/ CAROLYN J. CRAIG Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit, 8th floor 1100 L St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 305-7562 Fax: (202) 305-7644 e-mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant
August 26, 2003