Action Engineering v. Alumina
District Court, Virgin Islands
1Opinion of the CourtChristian, Chief Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I
This contract action was tried to the Court sitting without a jury. On the basis of the facts found and the applicable law, as set forth below, the Court finds that defendant Martin Marietta Alumina (hereinafter “MMA”) breached its contract with plaintiff Action Engineering (hereinafter “Action”). Relief will be in the form of restitution.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS
This case arises from a contract to construct two bulk lime holding silos at the MMA processing plant on St. Croix. MMA had encountered a variety of problems with its small bag lime handling process. In early 1976 a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Anvil Mining Co. v. HumbleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- United States Ex Rel. Susi Contracting Co. v. Zara Contracting Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- United States of America, for the Use of Coastal Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Algernon Blair, Incorporated, and United States Fidelity and Guaranty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1973
- United States Ex Rel. E & R Construction Co. v. Guy H. James Construction Co.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1972
- Joseph Scaduto v. Anthony J. Orlando, D/B/A A. J. Orlando Contracting Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hartzog ex rel. Perez v. United Corp.Superior Court of The Virgin Islands · 2011