Spearin v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporter's statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. On the 7th day of February, 1905, the claimant, George B. Spearin, entered into the contract with the United States, a copy of which, marked “ Exhibit A,” is annexed to the petition herein and a copy of the material parts of the plans and specifications mentioned in said contract is hereto attached, marked “Exhibit B,” and made a part hereof. II.
Read the full summary
The Reporter's statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. On the 7th day of February, 1905, the claimant, George B. Spearin, entered into the contract with the United States, a copy of which, marked “ Exhibit A,” is annexed to the petition herein and a copy of the material parts of the plans and specifications mentioned in said contract is hereto attached, marked “Exhibit B,” and made a part hereof. II. The site of said dry dock was upon low ground, nearly on the level of tidewater. To the south of said site and closely contiguous thereto was a paved street…
1Opinion of the CourtBooth, Judge
On February 7, 1905, the claimant, George B. Spearin, entered into a written contract with the defendants to furnish the materials and do certain construction work which was intended to finally result in the completion of a dry dock at the New York Navy Yard. All the work incident to the undertaking was provided for by plans and specifications prepared by the Bureau of Yards and Docks, and the contract itself was signed by Mordecai T. Endicott, chief of said bureau, as the representative of the United States.
Congress by the act of June 7, 1900, had authorized the building of the dry dock and…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States v. BehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Hollerbach v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Lem Moon Sing v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Christie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Hoe v. . SanbornNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- J. L. Simmons Company, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
- RM Hollingshead Corporation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1953
- Al Johnson Construction Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Johnson & Sons Erectors Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
- Whitlock Coil Pipe Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.