Legal Opinion

James F. Waters, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided May 31, 1932No. K-353PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLittletoN, Judge

Plaintiff admits that it was unable to furnish butter that would meet the specifications; that is, it could not furnish butter known to have been made from pasteurized milk and to have been subjected to the required heat treatments in the process of manufacture which would minimize the bacteria and insure the prolonged keeping quality of the product. It was unable to furnish butter subject to inspection at the creamery at time of manufacture. It contends that the specification requirement for creamery inspection was not of the essence of the agreement; that it was for the protection of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. American Smelting and Refining Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Garfielde v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  3. United States v. New York & Porto Rico Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
  4. Ackerlind v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  5. Scott v. United States.United States Court of Claims · 1909

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Singleton v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
  2. District of Columbia v. SingletonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API