Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, Chief Justice
There are three items involved in the claim in this case, and as to two of them, $3,453.83 and $480.26, with a deduction to be noted, the plaintiff is clearly entitled to recover. These two items represent the difference between 100 per cent land-grant deduction over part of the route and the 50 per cent land-grant deduction which was applicable under the act of October 6, 1917 (40 Stat. 361). This difference has not been paid. The third item, amounting to $2,215.50, presents a different question. The petition alleges that the *87amount claimed in the three items “ has not been paid ”, to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Reading Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Baird v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Southern Pacific Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1926
3Cited by1 opinion
- Houston & Texas Central Railroad v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1928