Legal Opinion

Associated Traders, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided January 14, 1959No. 359-55PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JONES, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff seeks reformation of a supply contract on the ground of alleged misrepresentation on the part of a representative of the defendant. In the alternative, it seeks reimbursement for asserted excess repurchase costs which the defendant paid for that portion of the contract materials which plaintiff failed to deliver according to the terms of its supply contract with the defendant.

The essential facts are cle'arly set out in our findings and will be summarized here.

According to the contract, plaintiff was to furnish 5,920 gallons of liquid “Adhesive, Label, Water…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Philippine Sugar Estates Development Co. v. Government of the Philippine IslandsSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  2. James Stewart & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1941
  3. In re Wilson-Nobles-Barr Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1918

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. River Construction Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1962
  2. Stein Bros. Mfg. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
  3. Roseburg Lumber Company v. Edward R. Madigan, Secretary of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
  4. C. J. Langenfelder & Son, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
  5. W. G. Cornell Company of Washington, D. C., Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967

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

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

Powered by the Exa API