First Suburban Water Utility District of Davidson County v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1DissentJones, Chief Judge
I am unable to agree with the conclusion reached by the majority.
The case turns on the construction of Article 10 of the contract between plaintiff and defendant, which reads as follows:
Contractor shall supply the water required by the United States for use at the project.
The majority of the court has construed the phrase “the water required” to mean “all the water needed.”
The word “required” is a very flexible term. Its meaning depends largely upon the circumstances surrounding its use and the setting in which it is used. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, 1951, it is defined…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Merriam v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Converse v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1930