Philadelphia Boiler Works v. United States

Court of Claims

Philadelphia Boiler Works v. United States

67 Ct. Cl. 311, 1929 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 372, 1929 WL 2527

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedMarch 18, 1929

DocketNo. D-562½

StatusPublished

This text of 67 Ct. Cl. 311 (Philadelphia Boiler Works 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

Philadelphia Boiler Works v. United States, 67 Ct. Cl. 311, 1929 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 372, 1929 WL 2527 (cc 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Graham, Judge,

delivered the opinion of court:

The facts are fully stated in the findings. The suit involves two claims by a subcontractor. There does not seem to have been any privity between plaintiff and the Government in either claim. But, however this may be, both claims are informal, and enforceable only under the Dent Act. Each claim was at different times presented to and rejected by the Board of Contract Adjustment of the War Department, and in neither case was any appeal taken from that decision to the Secretary of War. The claims not having [318]*318been passed upon by the Secretary of War, this court is without jurisdiction. See United States Bedding Co. v. United States, 55 C. Cls. 459.

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

Sinnott, Judge; Geeen, Judge; Moss, Judge; and Booth, Chief Justice, concur.

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

Graham, Judge,

delivered the opinion of court:

The facts are fully stated in the findings. The suit involves two claims by a subcontractor. There does not seem to have been any privity between plaintiff and the Government in either claim. But, however this may be, both claims are informal, and enforceable only under the Dent Act. Each claim was at different times presented to and rejected by the Board of Contract Adjustment of the War Department, and in neither case was any appeal taken from that decision to the Secretary of War. The claims not having [318]*318been passed upon by the Secretary of War, this court is without jurisdiction. See United States Bedding Co. v. United States, 55 C. Cls. 459.

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

Sinnott, Judge; Geeen, Judge; Moss, Judge; and Booth, Chief Justice, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 Ct. Cl. 311, 1929 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 372, 1929 WL 2527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philadelphia-boiler-works-v-united-states-cc-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack