Legal Opinion

Carol D. Heers, Harold W. Heers, and Charles M. Heers, Trading as Heers Associates, a California Partnership v. The United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided March 13, 1964No. 262-61PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

This case was referred pursuant to Rule 37(e) to W. Ney Evans, a trial commissioner of this court, with directions to make his recommendation for conclusions of law on plaintiff’s and defendant’s motions for summary judgment. The commissioner has done so in an opinion filed September 27, 1963, wherein he recommended that plaintiff is not entitled as a matter of law to recover, that defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted, that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be denied and that plaintiff’s petition be dismissed. The case was argued and submitted upon the granting by the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. P.L.S. Coat & Suit Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Anthony Grace & Sons, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
  2. Black, Raber-Kief & Associates v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
  3. Terminal Construction Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
  4. Lindy v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API