Legal Opinion
Varkell v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided July 17, 1964No. 186-63PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam :
Defendant offered for sale in California, as surplus property, and plaintiffs agreed to buy (among other things), some film described as follows:
Film: Kodak Linograph Shellburst safety film, clear base. Exposure Index 25, 35 MM, 400 Ft. Expiration date May 1957. Est. 322 Polls.
Est. Acquisition Cost: $1,384.60 Apparently Unused— Fair
The price bid for this item was $927.36.
The contract of sale included the following provisions:
1. INSPECTION'.1 Bidders are invited and urged to inspect the property to be sold prior to submitting bids. Property will be available for inspection at the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. SilvertonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1952
- Philip Krupp v. Federal Housing AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1961
- Standard Magnesium Corporation, a Kansas Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1957
- Montreal Securities, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
- Alloys & Chemicals Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Turner v. International Harvester CompanyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
- United States v. Robert W. AgnewCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- Pratt v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2001
- Gindy Mfg. Corp. v. CARDINALE TRUCK. CORP.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1970
- Pia v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1985
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.