See Taxes LXV, LXXI, LXXII, LXXIII, LXXXII, LXXXIII,
LXXXIV, LXXXV.
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL.
See Contracts VIII.
ADMISSION UNDER DURESS.
See Taxes CXV.
AGENCY OF GOVERNMENT.
See Jurisdiction IV, V. VI.
ALLOTMENTS.
See Indian Claims III.
AMENDED PETITION.
See U. S. Shipping Board VI.
AMENDED RETURN.
See Taxes LXXXIX, XC.
AMENDMENT TO CLAIMS.
See Taxes XCII, XCIII.
See Retired Pay I, II, III, IV, V.
ARMY OFFICER, PROPERTY OF.
I. Private property of an Army officer lost or damaged while
in a private residence because no public quarters were
available was "in the military service" within the
meaning of the Act of March 4, 1921. Jonitz v. United
States, 89 C. Cls. 155, cited. Jackson, 526.
II. Under section 4 of the Act of March 4, 1921, the decision
of the Secretary of War was "a final determination
of any claim cognizable under this chapter." Id.
ASSISTANT U. S. ATTORNEY.
I. Authority to employ and retain, in the name of the United
States, attorneys to assist the district attorneys is
vested by statute solely in the Attorney General of
United States. Vlachos, 165.
II. An attorney accepting an appointment as assistant to the
United States attorney was charged with constructive
knowledge of the conditions of the appointment. Id.
III. He who is without authority to bind his principal by an
express contract cannot be held to have done so by
implication. Id.
"AT ITS OWN RISK."
See Contracts XXVI.
BENEFICIARIES.
See Taxes LIV, LV, LVI, LVII, LVIII.
BOARD OF TAX APPEALS.
See Taxes XVII, LXXXVIII.
BREACH OF CONTRACT.
See Rental of Property by Government I, II.
CAPITAL STOCK TAX.
See Taxes XXX, XXXI, XXXIV, LXXXIX, XC.
CHANGED CONDITIONS.
See Contracts XLVI.
CHANGES MADE BY DEFENDANT.
See Contracts V, VI, VII.
CIVILIZATION ACT OF 1889.
See Indian Claims I.
CLAIM FOR REFUND.
See Taxes XLIII, XLIV, XLV, LXX, LXXXI, LXXXVI, XCI,
XCII, XCIII, XCIV, CXVII, CXVIII.
See Fraudulent Entry I, II, III, IV.
COMMENCEMENT OF SUIT.
Sec Rental of Property by Government III.
COMPTROLLER GENERAL.
See Contracts XLV, XLVII.
CONDEMNATION AWARD.
See Taxes CIII, CIV, CV, CVI, CVII, CXII.
CONSENT.
See Indian Claims III.
See Taxes XXVIII, XXXVI, XXXVII.
CONSIDERATION.
See Taxes IV.
CONSOLIDATION.
See Taxes LXIX.
CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTE.
See Taxes XXV.
CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE.
See Assistant United States Attorney II.
CONTEMPLATION OF DEATH.
See Taxes I, II.
CONTRACTING OFFICER.
See Contracts XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXXI,
XXXII, XXXIV, XLIV, XLV.
I. Where contract between the plaintiff contractor and the
Government provided that of the persons employed
on the project preference should be given to persons
referred for such work by the United States Employ-
ment Service and from the public relief rolls, and
where the United States Employment Service was not
able to furnish a sufficient number of men qualified to
carry on the work and the necessary number of men
could not be obtained in accordance with the terms of
the contract, it is held that the contract carried an
implied provision that the defendant would furnish the
necessary workmen to complete the work within the
required time, and its failure so to do was a breach
of the contract. Young-Felhaber Pile Co., 4.
II. Where the contract provided that the provision as to
obtaining labor from the public relief rolls might be
waived with the specific authorization of the Works
Progress Administration, and where no request for
such waiver was ever made by the plaintiff, it is held
that the plaintiff violated no provision of the contract
by not requesting such waiver, since there was nothing
in the contract that required the Works Progress Ad-
ministration to give such permission or consent; and,
further, no such labor was available even if such
request had been made. Id.
III. Where there was a further delay caused by a truck
drivers' strike, it is held that since the defendant was
in no way responsible for said strike, it is not liable for
such further delay. Id.
IV. Where plaintiff executed a voucher for final payment in
accordance with the terms of the contract, but before
such execution had notified the contracting officer, rep-
resenting the defendant, that it would ask additional
compensation on account of the delay, it is held in the
circumstances of the case plaintiff was not barred from
recovering damages by the signing of the voucher.
Id.
Plaintiff under a contract with the Navy Department
manufactured sixteen forced draft blowers for use in
the cruisers Louisville and Chicago, then under con-
struction. The contract provided that all 16 blowers
be delivered by March 1, 1929, with no penalty pro-
vision for delayed delivery. Eight of the blowers were
delivered to the Navy Yard at Puget Sound, Wash-
ington, June 15, 1930, and eight were delivered to
the Navy Yard, at Mare Island, California, seven on
August 9, 1930, and one on September 5, 1930; all
of the sixteen blowers having been tested and inspected
by three competent naval inspectors, before shipment,
at the Boston Navy Yard, and the official Naval stamp
having been placed on the machines. Upon delivery
to the Navy Yards at Puget Sound and Mare Island,
respectively, blowers were subjected to tests and in-
spections which disclosed defects, being out of balance
dynamically, and having other faults, all of which
were officially called to the attention of plaintiff.
After correction by the Navy Yard employees of dis-
coverable defects and certain other changes and re-
pairs, the blowers were finally installed in the
cruisers and have since operated satisfactorily at the
required speeds. The Navy Department, in its settle-
ment with plaintiff-contractor, deducted from the con-
tract price the cost of making the repairs and changes
which were necessary to make them conform to the
provisions of the contract. The plaintiff sues for the
recovery of the amount so withheld.
V. There was no unwarranted deviation by the defendant
from the terms of the contract and specifications in
remedying and correcting the defects found to exist
in the blowers upon delivery. Sturtevant, 93.
VI. Changes in a manufactured article may not arbitrarily
be made and charged to the contractor's account. Id.
VII. In the instant case, it is held that no proof is submitted
to show that plaintiff sustained any damage by reason
of action of defendant. Id.
VIII. Plaintiff, under a contract with the Treasury Department,
Procurement Division, agreed to furnish and deliver,
and did furnish and deliver, approximately 30 tons of
structural steel to be used in the construction of a
portable grandstand. After such delivery, a question
arose as to 6,500 angles required for completing the
structure. Plaintiff, though contending the contract did
not require it to furnish these angles, nevertheless
agreed to furnish said angles in order that the grand-
stand might be used for a parade, with the understand-
ing plaintiff would later present a claim for payment.
Held:
The contract required the plaintiff to furnish only the
30 tons of structural steel required for 300 bents, as
shown on the drawing, but not the 6,500 angles, also
shown on drawing. Williams Iron & Bronze, 111.
IX. Contractor entered into contract with the Government
to supply all labor and material and to construct bath-
house, swimming pool and other playground structures
on High School grounds in the City of Washington,
D. C., and began work on the contract; whereupon
contractor received notice that the Comptroller General
|