Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporter''s statement of the case: The following are the facts, of the case as found by the court: I. The plaintiff, the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, is, and was during the transactions hereinafter described, a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Maryland, and was the owner of a system of railroads engaged in interstate commerce. II. About September 1, 1917, Lieut. Col.
Read the full summary
The Reporter''s statement of the case: The following are the facts, of the case as found by the court: I. The plaintiff, the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, is, and was during the transactions hereinafter described, a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Maryland, and was the owner of a system of railroads engaged in interstate commerce. II. About September 1, 1917, Lieut. Col. Amos W. Kim-ball, was ordered for duty at Baltimore, Md., to establish an expeditionary depot and to take charge of all supplies arriving at that place for transportation to New York and…
1Opinion of the CourtOampkeix, Chief Justice
The plaintiff, Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, sues for a large sum alleged to have been laid out and expended in the construction of barracks for United States troops at Locust Point, Md.
The claim was first presented to the War Department Claims Board under what is known as the Dent Act. 40 *147Stat. 1272, in the names of two parties, “ as their interests may appear,” but it comes to this court upon the petition of the railroad company alone. The board held that no contract, express or implied, was shown by the proof; this ruling was sustained by the appeal section of the board, and upon…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Teetor-Hartley Motor Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1926