Legal Opinion
United States v. The Goldfield Corporation as Successor to American Chrome Company
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided November 2, 1967No. 9143_1PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HICKEY, Circuit Judge.
The United States, appellant, brought this action against appellee Goldfield, as successor to American Chrome, a subsidiary, for an accounting and restitution of allegedly exorbitant and unconscionable profits realized under a contract to procure chromium for stockpiling.
A team representing the government negotiated the contract with the officers of American Chrome. It is alleged that during the course of negotiations American Chrome induced a material conflict of interest on the part of Lukens, a government negotiator and fiscal advisor to the team, and as a result the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- United States v. Louis IrwinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- Alma M. Epperson, Administratix of the Estate of Arthur R. Epperson, Deceased v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1963
3Cited by4 opinions
- Norman v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1970
- Norman v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1970
- Enerdyne Corporation v. Wm. Lyon Development Co., Inc., and Panorama Company, Inc., Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1973
- Joseph A. Winkler v. Texoma Production Company, a Corporation, and Terra Resources, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985