Nixon v. United States

59 Ct. Cl. 684, 1924 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 415, 1924 WL 2415
United States Court of Claims·Decided May 12, 1924·No. No. D-175·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[685] memorandum by the court

The petition does not show a contract, express or implied, in accordance with the requirements of the Dent Act, 40 Stat., 1272. This act authorizes compensation for expenditures made upon the faith of an “ agreement, express or implied,” entered into by a plaintiff with an officer or agent acting under the authority of the Secretary of War or the President, and acting within the scope of his authority when such an agreement was not executed in the manner provided by law. See Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. Case, 261 U. S. 592, 596. The implied agreement contemplated by the Dent Act must be an actual agreement; that is, an agreement “ implied in fact,” founded .upon a meeting of the minds. See Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. Case, supra (p. 597) and also Baltimore c& Ohio R. R. Co. Case, 261 U. S. 385, 386.

The petition is dismissed.

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

Nixon v. United States, 59 Ct. Cl. 684, 1924 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 415, 1924 WL 2415 (cc 1924).

59 Ct. Cl. 684 (Nixon v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Roettinger v. United States
63 Ct. Cl. 315 (Court of Claims, 1927)
Ferguson v. United States
60 Ct. Cl. 649 (Court of Claims, 1925)