Wise v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. The case is stated in the opinion. Whether a contract provides for a penalty or liquida^ d damages is to be decided by considering the essential nature of the deduction provided for and not by the name given to it by the parties. Sun Printing Association v. Moore, 183 U. S. 642; United States v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 205 U. S. 105; District of Columbia v. Harlan & Hollingsworth, 30 App. D. C. 270, 279; McCall v. Deuchler, 174 Fed.
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. The case is stated in the opinion. Whether a contract provides for a penalty or liquida^ d damages is to be decided by considering the essential nature of the deduction provided for and not by the name given to it by the parties. Sun Printing Association v. Moore, 183 U. S. 642; United States v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 205 U. S. 105; District of Columbia v. Harlan & Hollingsworth, 30 App. D. C. 270, 279; McCall v. Deuchler, 174 Fed. Rep.. 133, 134; Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. Co. v. Dockery, 195 Fed. Rep. 221. Liquidation of damages necessarily implies a…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clarke
In December, 1904, Stannard, represented in this case by his Trustee in Bankruptcy, contracted with the-United States to erect two laboratory buildings for the Department of Agriculture, in the city of Washington, D. C., for $1,171,000. The buildings were both to be completed in thirty months and for a delay of 101 days beyond the contract period the Government deducted from the contract price $200 a day, the amount stipulated in the contract as liquidated damages, a total of $20,200, and the claim made in this court is for the recovery of that amount.
The Court of Claims dismissed the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- United States v. Bethlehem Steel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
3Cited by112 opinions
- Priebe & Sons, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Knutton v. CofieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- K-Con Building Systems, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2015
- In Re Tastyeast, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
- Psaty & Fuhrman, Inc. v. Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1949
107 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.