Legal Opinion

Chavez v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided October 27, 1989No. 392-87CPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Judge:

This action came before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to RUSCC 56. Defendant maintained that because plaintiff Richards orally contracted with officers of the United States Department of Agriculture who were not authorized to contract under the program involved in this case, no express or implied-in-fact contract existed.

FACTS

Plaintiff, Tags Richards, claimed that the United States refused to pay for services rendered on an irrigation project in Lincoln County, New Mexico. He asserted that defendant, acting through the Soil…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. MerrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1947

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. City of Cincinnati v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  2. Johnson Controls World Services, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1999
  3. Heydt v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
  4. Eastern Trans-Waste of Maryland, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1992
  5. Buffalo National Bank v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1992

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

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

Powered by the Exa API