THE UNITED STATES

                           No. 109-80C

1981 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 1388

V. Jerome Wieman, Pro se

Randall B. Weill, with whom was Acting Assistant Attorney General
Thomas S. Martin, for defendant.

NICHOLS, Judge, Presiding, KASHIWA and SMITH, Judges.


This case is before us on cross-motions for summary judgment.
The plaintiff is not represented by counsel.  He did business in
his individual capacity trading as Merchant Service Company.  He
had two contracts with the Government Printing Office (GPO) for
hauling paper stock.  Both were terminated for default but he
contends that defendant drove him out of business by various acts
including harassment and sabotage by its employees.  There may be
a question who rightfully is prosecuting the claim as plaintiff
says he is bankrupt.  Plaintiff prosecuted his claim before the
GPO Board of Contract Appeals which held against him. He seeks
Wunderlich review, 41 U.S.C.   321, 322, but the inartfully
drafted petition includes allegations that also assert a breach
or breaches of the contracts.  So far as the proceeding is to
obtain Wunderlich Act relief, the issues are not of law but
involve whether numerous findings of the board are or are not
supported by substantial evidence.  There is need of the services
of the trial division to ascertain if plaintiff is the proper
person to prosecute the claim, to clarify and amend the
pleadings, to separate for trial purposes, if necessary, breach
issues, to determine whether substantial evidence in the record
supports the board findings, and to take whatever other steps are
necessary for a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of the

Accordingly, the cross-motions for summary judgment are referred
to the trial division under Rule 54(a) and the suspension of the
case is lifted, leaving the trial division to take whatever steps
are necessary to execute this order.

April 10, 1981