Legal Opinion

Thomas v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided November 20, 1974No. 352-69PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

This case comes before the court on plaintiffs’ exceptions to the recommended decision filed March 12,1974, by Trial Judge C. Murray Bernhardt pursuant to Rule 134 (h), having been submitted and considered upon the briefs and oral argument of counsel.

Since the court agrees with the trial judge’s recommended decision, as to the claims of the plaintiffs against the defendant, as hereinafter sot forth, it hereby affirms and adopts the said decision as the basis for its judgment as to these claims in this case. It is therefore concluded that plaintiffs are not entitled to recover on…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Rolls-Royce Limited, Derby, England, a British Company v. The United States and United Aircraft Corporation, Defendant-IntervenorUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
  2. Bowser, Inc. v. The United States and General Steel Tank Co., Inc., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
  3. Ottman v. Nixon-NirdlingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  4. Morrisville Shopping Center, Inc. v. Sun Ray Drug Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Girard Trust Co. v. CosgroveSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Foster v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1979
  2. Yaist v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1981
  3. Rocklen, Inc. v. RadulescoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987
  4. Allenfield Associates v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1998
  5. Berkeley Dev. Co. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API