American Electric Co. v. United States

Court of Claims

American Electric Co. v. United States

60 Ct. Cl. 993, 1925 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 411, 1925 WL 2789

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedJune 8, 1925

DocketNo. B-14

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 60 Ct. Cl. 993 (American Electric Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Electric Co. v. United States, 60 Ct. Cl. 993, 1925 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 411, 1925 WL 2789 (cc 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

[994]*994MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT

The defendant concedes, and we think properly, that the plaintiff should recover the amount sued for, $802.34. It represented deduction on account of liquidated damages, which the defendant’s officers making the same concluded should be deducted from the amount due plaintiff under the contract. It appears, however, that the date upon which these officers relied, November 14th, was erroneous. What the parties intended was that the deliveries under this contract should commence with the date on which the completion of order number 7087 was due. Order 7087 antedated the contract in question and was due for completion on December 10. Taking December 10 as the correct date, all deliveries were made in due time, according to the stipulations of the contract, and plaintiff was not liable for liquidated damages.

Graham, Judge, took no part in the decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[994]*994MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT

The defendant concedes, and we think properly, that the plaintiff should recover the amount sued for, $802.34. It represented deduction on account of liquidated damages, which the defendant’s officers making the same concluded should be deducted from the amount due plaintiff under the contract. It appears, however, that the date upon which these officers relied, November 14th, was erroneous. What the parties intended was that the deliveries under this contract should commence with the date on which the completion of order number 7087 was due. Order 7087 antedated the contract in question and was due for completion on December 10. Taking December 10 as the correct date, all deliveries were made in due time, according to the stipulations of the contract, and plaintiff was not liable for liquidated damages.

Graham, Judge, took no part in the decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 Ct. Cl. 993, 1925 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 411, 1925 WL 2789, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-electric-co-v-united-states-cc-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack