Bowers Hydraulic Dredging Co. v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. The facts are stated in the opinion. The language of the contract is plain. The decision of the engineer in charge was required; not the decision of the chief of the corps; not the decision of the Secretary of War; not obedience to instructions. Mansfield &c.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. The facts are stated in the opinion. The language of the contract is plain. The decision of the engineer in charge was required; not the decision of the chief of the corps; not the decision of the Secretary of War; not obedience to instructions. Mansfield &c. R. Co. v. Veeder, 17 Ohio, 204, 385; 'Baldwin’s Case, 15 C. Cls. 297, 303; King’s Case, 37 C. Cls. 428; Kendall v. United States, 12 Pet. 524,608. The power vested in the engineer in charge was such that he could not delegate it, nor could any one else, assume it, no matter how high his station, nor could…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice White
The appellant, the dredge company, sued to recover $28,321.76. The relief sought was based on the averment that under a contract for dredging a channel, in the Christiana River and in or about the harbor of Wilmington, Delaware, made in 1399, and a supplementary contract made in June, 1901, ¡he dredge company had excavated 200,430 cubic yards of earth, for which, at the contract price, it should have been paid the sum sued for, but that the United States, m making settlement under the contract, despite the protest of the dredge company, had declined to pay, upon the ground that excavating and…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Mark Levy, Derivatively on Behalf of Immunogen Inc. v. Southbrook International Investments, Ltd. And Immunogen, Inc., Nominal-Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Greenfield v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2007
- Cresswell v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1959
- Avedon Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1988
- City of Memphis, Tennessee, for and on Behalf of the Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1962
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.