Halby Chemical Co. v. United States

180 Ct. Cl. 584, 19 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1589, 1967 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 23, 1967 WL 9034
United States Court of Claims·Decided June 9, 1967·No. No. 185-65; No. 186-65·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This case was referred to Trial Commissioner W. Ney Evans with, directions to make findings of fact and recommendation for conclusions of law. The commissioner has done so in a report and opinion filed on March 30, 1967. On April 26,1967, plaintiffs filed a tentative notice of intention to except to the commissioner’s findings of fact provided, however, that if the defendant should not file exceptions, the plaintiffs would not do so. On April 28,1967, [586] the defendant filed a motion for minor revision of the trial commissioner’s report or for enlargement of time to file notice of intention to except under Rule 59. Thereafter, the parties notified the court that should the minor revision requested by the defendant be made, the commissioner’s report, findings of fact, and recommended conclusion of law would be acceptable. Since the court agrees with the commissioner’s findings of fact, opinion and recommended conclusion of law, revised and modified as requested by the defendant and accepted by the parties, it hereby adopts the same as the basis for its judgment in this case without oral argument. Plaintiffs are, therefore, entitled to recover and judgment is entered for plaintiffs with the amount of recovery to be determined in further proceedings pursuant to Rule 47(c).

OPINION OF COMMISSIONER

Footnotes

Halby Chemical Co. v. United States, 180 Ct. Cl. 584, 19 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1589, 1967 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 23, 1967 WL 9034 (cc 1967).

180 Ct. Cl. 584 (Halby Chemical Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

C. E. Hooper, Inc. v. United States
539 F.2d 1276 (Court of Claims, 1976)
Inland Oil and Chemical Corporation v. United States
338 F. Supp. 1330 (D. Maryland, 1972)