Owen v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimants, James H. Owen and Charles H. Hille, are citizens of the United States, and at the time of the occurrence of all the events hereinafter mentioned and the time of filing suit herein were citizens of 'the United States and copartners under the firm name of Owen & Hille, engaged in business as contractors and builders, and during the year 1896 they had their…
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimants, James H. Owen and Charles H. Hille, are citizens of the United States, and at the time of the occurrence of all the events hereinafter mentioned and the time of filing suit herein were citizens of 'the United States and copartners under the firm name of Owen & Hille, engaged in business as contractors and builders, and during the year 1896 they had their principal office and place of business in the city of Minneapolis, in the State of Minnesota. II. On the 24th day of…
1Opinion of the CourtBarnet, J.
This is a suit to recover for additional cost of construction incurred in the erection of several buildings at the Bosebud Indian Agency, S. Dak., under a contract between the plaintiffs and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs dated August 24, 1896, and approved September 10, 1896. The contract provided that the plaintiffs should furnish all labor and materials for the completion of the buildings, except the brick, and to have the buildings ready for occupancy within twTo hundred and forty days after the date of the approval of the contract or suffer a penalty of $50 per day for delay beyond…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kihlberg v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Henderson Bridge Co. v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Chouteau v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Cotton v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1903
3Cited by5 opinions
- George Sollitt Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Moore v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1910
- Hirsch v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1941
- United States Ex Rel. Edward E. Morgan Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1944
- Richtman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1912