DISMISSED: March 14, 1997
                                                  


                              GSBCA 13777-SBA


                            S. A. LUDSIN & CO.,

                                             Appellant,

                                    v.

                      SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION,

                                             Respondent.

     Steven A. Ludsin of S. A. Ludsin & Co., Fairfield, NJ,
appearing for Appellant.

     Timothy C. Treanor, Eric S. Benderson, and David A. Fishman,
Office of General Counsel, Small Business Administration,
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman).

                                   ORDER

     S. A. Ludsin & Co. (Ludsin) presented two claims to Small
Business Administration (SBA) contracting officers under a contract
between the two parties described as "Marketing and Sale of the
U.S. Small Business Administration COLPUR 'Collateral Purchased'
Real Estate."  One claim was for $1,600,000 in lost commissions;
the other was for $1,667 in final contract payment.  The
contracting officer denied the first claim; his failure to respond
to the second constituted a deemed denial of it.  Through an appeal
to this Board, Ludsin challenged these actions.

     By decision dated February 19, 1997, we granted the SBA's
motion for summary relief as to the portion of the case dealing
with the first claim, thereby denying the appeal of the contracting
officer's decision as to that matter.  We denied the agency's
motion to dismiss the portion of the case dealing with the second
claim and asked the parties to propose a schedule for further
proceedings relating to it.

     In response, the SBA, believing that the amount remaining in
controversy did not justify the cost of further litigation, offered
to Ludsin payment of the claimed amount.  Ludsin declined the offer
and requested discovery and a hearing on the matter.  Both parties
requested a conference with the Board.

     At the conference, Ludsin explained that he desired further
proceedings so as not to impair his opportunity to seek attorney
fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 5
U.S.C.  504.  The Board noted that the February 19 decision
specifically advised that we consider applications for
reimbursement of such fees and costs as separate cases to be filed
subsequent to final disposition of underlying appeals.  Slip op. at
16; Rule 135.

     At a second conference, the parties agreed that the SBA will
pay, and Ludsin will accept, $1,667 as full payment of the amount
claimed for final contract payment; that the portion of this case
which remains before the Board, concerning this claim, shall be
dismissed; and that the dismissal does not affect Ludsin's right to
file an application or applications for reimbursement of attorney
fees and costs incurred as to this case.  The parties understood
that their differences as to Ludsin's entitlement to recover any
fees and costs, and the amounts due if such entitlement exists,
will be addressed in the course of whatever cost application or
applications Ludsin may timely file.  The Board stated the parties'
agreement in a memorandum, provided the memorandum to both parties,
and afforded both an opportunity to object to its terms.  No
objection was filed.

     Without objection, the portion of the case not resolved in the
February 19 decision is DISMISSED.





                                   _________________________
                                   STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                   Board Judge