Legal Opinion
Byron Jackson Co. v. United States
District Court, S.D. California
Decided November 26, 1940No. 350-YPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YANKWICH, District Judge.
By its complaint under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C.A. § 41 (20), the plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of $4,950 alleged to be due under a contract in writing with the Government, acting through the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture, for the sale of three single suction centrifugal pumps. The total purchase price was $17,672, of which $12,722 has been paid. The answer admits nonpayment and justifies the deduction of $4,950 by reason of a clause in the contract penalizing the contractor $25.00 per unit per calendar day for delay in…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Board of Comm'rs of Jackson Cty. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Poindexter v. GreenhowSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Deitrick v. GreaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1940
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. Sandy Sommerville, Trading and Doing Business Under the Name and Style, New Wilmington Livestock AuctionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1964
- Ervin v. . Conn and Bank v. . FredericksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- California State Council of Carpenters v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Ervin v. ConnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- United States v. Clearfield Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.