Legal Opinion

United States v. United Drill & Tool Corp.

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided November 23, 1948No. Civ. A. No. 3874-47PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLTZOFF, District Judge.

This case presents the question whether interest is payable on an amount due to the United States from a government contractor under the Renegotiation Acts, 50 U.S. C. A.Appendix, § 1191. It is a case relating to a contract made during World War II.

Admittedly, neither the statute nor the determination makes any provision for interest. It has been held, however, that obligations for the payment of money to the United States impliedly bear interest on equitable principles, Royal Indemnity Co. v. United States, 313 U.S. 289, 61 S.Ct. 995, 85 L.Ed. 1361.

The precise…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Royal Indemnity Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Rodgers v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Sampson Motors, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948
  4. United States v. ClarkDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1947
  5. Arkansas Valley Ry., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1946

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Speed v. Transamerica CorporationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1955
  2. Hartford National Bank & Trust Co. v. E. F. Drew & Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1960
  3. United States v. HopkinsDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1951
  4. Kurtzon v. KurtzonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API