Legal Opinion

Penn Bridge Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided October 20, 1924No. D-93PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDowNby, Judge

The facts are removed from controversy by a stipulation and the questions for determination are not complicated.

The chief contention arises by reason of a provision in the contract for the assessment of liquidated damages for delay in performance together with the cost of inspection and superintendence during the period of delay, accom-*896paniecl by a provision that no such deduction and charges shall be made for such period as, “ in the judgment of the contracting officer, approved by the Chief of Engineers, shall equal the time which shall have been lost through any cause for which the United…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Kihlberg v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Martinsburg & Potomac Railroad v. MarchSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  3. United States v. GleasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  4. Sweeney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  5. Chicago, Santa Fé & California Railroad v. PriceSupreme Court of the United States · 1891

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Mitchell Canneries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948
  2. James Graham Mfg. Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1950
  3. McShain Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1936
  4. Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corp. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1951
  5. Leeds & Northrup Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1951

11 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