Legal Opinion

Diamond v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided March 1, 1943No. 45419PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadden, Judge

On February 9,1940, plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant to install a large turbo-alternator, condenser, and auxiliary equipment at the Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Virginia, for $22,640. The machines to be installed *549were, according to plaintiff's contract, to be furnished by the Government “under other contracts.” They were in fact bought from a manufacturer, but whether they were made to order or ready made by that manufacturer, we do not know.

As shown in our findings of fact, plaintiff was notified on March 6, 1940, to proceed with the work. That fixed the completion date…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. RiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1942

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Law v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971
  2. Harwood-Nebel Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1945
  3. B-W Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1945

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

Powered by the Exa API