History
  • No items yet
midpage
Guss v. United States
61 Ct. Cl. 301
Ct. Cl.
1925
Check Treatment
Graham, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The facts are fully set out in the findings. Plaintiffs claim that the Government contracted to purchase certain quantities of arsenal jute canvas padding at a certain price per yard. Plaintiffs had previously ordered this material to be manufactured in Scotland, but at the time it had not arrived in the United States. At the time of the alleged contract it was not known how much of this material would arrive in the United States, nor when or where it would arrive, nor in what condition it would be after arrival. Portions of it after arrival in the United States were jmrchased by the United States Government on a written order in each instance. The Government refused to take and receive other portions, including, some that did not arrive until after the armistice. Plaintiffs claimed to have suffered a loss by reason of this refusal of the Government to take and pay for it.

The only question is, Was there a contract?

The findings clearly show that the representative did not enter into any agreement to purchase and refused at the time of the alleged purchase and thereafter to issue orders for supplying goods as claimed. No contract has been shown which obligated the Government to pay.

The petition should be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

Hay, Judge; Downey, Judge; Booth, Judge; and Campbell, Chief Justice, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Guss v. United States
Court Name: United States Court of Claims
Date Published: Dec 7, 1925
Citation: 61 Ct. Cl. 301
Docket Number: No. D-328
Court Abbreviation: Ct. Cl.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.