Legal Opinion

Converse v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided April 21, 1930No. D-548PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreen, Judge

This suit is begun by plaintiffs to recover sums alleged to be due upon two contracts whereby plaintiffs agreed to do certain dredging for the defendant, and defendant was to pay therefor in accordance with the amount of dredging performed. Of these two contracts, the second was supplemental to the first. The plaintiffs performed the first contract in accordance with its terms and provisions, but allege defendant withheld $321.37 of the amount which thereby became due, and only paid the balance.

Plaintiffs also performed the second contract, and allege that defendant withheld $403.62 from the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. The ConquerorSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. Federal Lead Co. v. SwyersCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
  3. Duhamel v. Port Angeles Stone Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. First Suburban Water Utility District of Davidson County v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1954
  2. Brand Inv. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1944
  3. Brand Inv. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1944
  4. First Suburban Water Utility District of Davidson County v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API