Michigan Steel Box Co. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
On the Proofs. The Reporter’s statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the city of Toledo, in the State of Ohio; and the claimant, trading as the Michigan Steel Box Co., entered into the contract with the United States for the furnishing of letter boxes, dated May 2, 1901, a copy of which is attached to the petition in this case. II.
Read the full summary
On the Proofs. The Reporter’s statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the city of Toledo, in the State of Ohio; and the claimant, trading as the Michigan Steel Box Co., entered into the contract with the United States for the furnishing of letter boxes, dated May 2, 1901, a copy of which is attached to the petition in this case. II. Said Michigan Steel Box Co. was not incorporated; but was a partnership or voluntary association of persons in which Eugene D. Scheble, Otto Marx, A.…
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, Chief Justice
The claimant sues for an alleged balance upon the contract price of letter boxes delivered to the defendants under the contract, a copy of which is attached to the petition. The contract was annulled by the Government in June, 1903, after a large number of the letter boxes of different sixes as called for in the contract had been furnished. Payments had been regularly made until about the time of the annulment, and at that time there remained unpaid upon the contract price of the letter boxes furnished the sum of $32,331.90. There was due to the subcontractors who manufactured the boxes, for…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Williamson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Trist v. ChildSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Tool Co. v. NorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Kirby v. TallmadgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- K & R Engineering Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1980
- Curved Electrotype Plate Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1915
- Rankin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1943
- WeissUnited States Court of Claims · 1961
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.