Legal Opinion

Carnegie Steel Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided March 16, 1914No. 32463PublishedCited by 1 opinion

On defendants' Demurrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The averments of the petition to.which the defendants demnr will be found sufficiently set out in the opinion of the court. The contract must be read in the light of the scientific knowledge possessed by manufacturers and other persons skilled in the art, when it was made.

Read the full summary

On defendants' Demurrer. The Reporters’ statement of the case: The averments of the petition to.which the defendants demnr will be found sufficiently set out in the opinion of the court. The contract must be read in the light of the scientific knowledge possessed by manufacturers and other persons skilled in the art, when it was made. Merriam v. United States, 107 U. S., 437, 441: “It is a fundamental rule that in the construction of contracts the courts may look not only to the language employed, but to the subject matter and the surrounding circumstances, and may avail themselves of the…

1Opinion of the CourtCampbeel, Chief Justice

The contract, a copy of which is attached to the petition, provided for liquidated damages and that “ in making final settlement based upon the completion of the delivery the party of the first part [claimant] shall receive credit for *407such delays occurring during the performance of the contract as the said Chief of Ordnance may determine to have been due to unavoidable causes, such as * * * action of the United States,” etc. The defendants demur to the petition.

The Chief of Ordnance determined that 99 days of the delay were chargeable to the defendants. The difficulties under which claimant…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  2. The HarrimanSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  3. Pacific Hardware & Steel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1914
  4. Satterlee v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1895

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Rice v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API