Eslin v. District of Columbia
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the case: These cases were referred • to Daniel Donovan, esq., referee, and were heard together on exceptions to his report. The court, however, disregarded the report and filed findings of fact. Regulations and extracts from the minutes of the Board of Public Works and certain official letters are set forth in the findings in these cases, but are identical with those set forth in extenso in Finding II in the preceding case of Barnes.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of the case: These cases were referred • to Daniel Donovan, esq., referee, and were heard together on exceptions to his report. The court, however, disregarded the report and filed findings of fact. Regulations and extracts from the minutes of the Board of Public Works and certain official letters are set forth in the findings in these cases, but are identical with those set forth in extenso in Finding II in the preceding case of Barnes. The principal contract in this case, No. 243, was on the same printed blank, and in the same words as the contract set forth in…
1Opinion of the CourtScofield, J.
■ ’..Daniel A. Connolly, in his life-time, had a large number of written contracts with the District of Columbiafor the improvement of the streets-of Washington. His administrator brings this.snit.to .recoyer-alleged balances due on eleven of these . contracts, with their so-called extensions.
In the three other suits, consolidated and tried with this one, the claims are based upon assignments from Connolly of portions of such balances.
The claims of Eslin, administrator of Connolly, as set forth 'in his petition, may be tabulated as follows :
- The balances.claimed upon contracts Nos.'209, 231;…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- The United States, in Error v. Walter Jones, Administrator De Bonis Non of Benjamin G. OrrSupreme Court of the United States · 1834
3Cited by2 opinions
- Eslin v. DisTrict of ColumbiaUnited States Court of Claims · 1894
- Dickson v. District of ColumbiaUnited States Court of Claims · 1896