Legal Opinion

Hammel-Dahl Co. v. United States

District Court, D. Rhode Island

Decided December 31, 1957No. Civ. A. No. 1973PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DAY, District Judge.

Plaintiff, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Rhode Island, has brought this action to recover a balance alleged to be due and owing to it under a contract for the manufacture and sale of 224 valves to the Atomic Energy Commission. Jurisdiction of this Court exists under the provision of Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346(2), the Tucker Act, so-called. Although the plaintiff claims there is due and owing to it the sum of $12,035.80, it seeks judgment in the sum of $10,000, the *9maximum amount recoverable under the Tucker Act, plus interest and costs.

The defendant…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Globe Refining Co. v. Landa Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1903
  2. Gulf States Creosoting Co. v. LovingCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1941
  3. Marcus Co., Inc. v. K.L.G. Baking Co., Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1939
  4. P. Wigham-Richardson & Co. v. Continental Grain Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1939

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Oliver-Electrical Manufacturing Co. v. I. O. Teigen Construction Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1959
  2. American Home Assurance Company and The Continental Insurance Company v. TIG Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2026
  3. American Home Assurance Company and The Continental Insurance Company v. TIG Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2026
  4. EVA CHAVOLLA v. DARLING INGREDIENTS INC.District Court, E.D. California · 2025
  5. Shijin Vapor LLC v. Bolt USA, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API