Legal Opinion

Cygnet Manufacturing Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 1, 1925No. A-115PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBooth, Judge

This case may not involve a prolonged discussion. The findings disclose the transaction in detail. The Army during the war needed especially a practicable type of tripod for use in connection with machine guns. The plaintiff first designated a type which, after actual test, met the requirements of the service, and 300 of this type were manufactured, delivered to, and paid for by the defendant. They were used by the Marine Corps, and covered by letters patent #1,320702. During the course of fulfilling the contract for the Marine Corps tripods the plaintiff delivered an improved type of tripod,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. United States v. BehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Wisconsin Central Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  3. Solomons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  4. Crozier v. Fried. Krupp AktiengesellschaftSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  5. Clark v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Farrand Optical Co., Inc. v. The United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
  2. Farrand Optical Co., Inc. v. The United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API