Smith Courtney Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The facts of the case will be found set forth in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtAtkinson, J.
The material allegations contained in claimant’s petition are that on June 22, 1900, the claimant company entered into a contract with the United States by their agent, the Paymaster General of the Navy, wherein claimant agreed to deliver at the Norfolk (Ya.) Navy Yard, within a specified period, certain supplies of iron and steel, and that said material was delivered on May 29, 1901, inspected and accepted on May 23,1903, and a bill- for the same, in the sum of $700.66, was on May 7, 1901, presented to the general storekeeper at the navy yard, Norfolk, Ya., to be forwarded by him to the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Nager Electric Company, Inc. And Keystone Engineering Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
- Oceanic Steamship Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
- Austin Engineering Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1939
- Pennsylvania Coal & Coke Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1947
- Doe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.