John Thomson Press, & Manufacturing Co v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtGraham, Judge
The facts in this case do not require any full or detailed discussion. They are fully set forth in the findings.
The plaintiff entered into a formal written contract to manufacture 800,000 3-inch projectiles according to the terms and conditions of the contract and specifications, which contract and specifications the plaintiff has attached to its petition and made part thereof. Prior to the time the contract was entered into two methods were being used for preparing the cavities of these projectiles. Aside from the production in some Government operated shops, the extent of which production…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kihlberg v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Day v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Kennedy v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1889
- Driscoll v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1899
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- Rolin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1958
- Inslaw, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1998
- Nugent Construction Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1924