Standard Fish & Produce Co. v. United States

74 Ct. Cl. 623, 1932 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 441, 1932 WL 2066
United States Court of Claims·Decided May 2, 1932·No. No. K-374·Published

Opinion

Whaley, Judge,

delivered the opinion:

The plaintiff brings this action to recover the cost and expenses of a shipment of potatoes to the Quartermaster at Fort Bragg, N. C., on the ground that the shipment was wrongfully rejected.

The plain tiff was awarded on May 14, 1929, after advertisement and bid, Purchase Order No. 768-29, Requisition No. 159-352-29, by the Quartermaster Corps of the War Department, for the delivery of a certain quantity of Irish potatoes at a certain specified price, to be delivered “as if called for on or before June 30, 1929.” The potatoes were to conform to the U. S. A. Quartermaster Corps Specification No. 22-119A. Circular Proposal No. 159-29-32, made a part of the order, provided inter alia that the deliveries would be subject to inspection at destination and that quantities listed were subject to increase or decrease not to exceed 25%.

The Quartermaster at Fort Bragg, on June 10, 1929, made a call upon the plaintiff for delivery of the potatoes at Fort Bragg. In compliance with this call the plaintiff shipped a carload of potatoes containing 200 sacks from Greenville, Michigan, to Fort Bragg, N. C. When the potatoes arrived at their destination the commissary officer of the Quartermaster Corps inspected the shipment and estimated that between 30% and 50% of the entire shipment had “hollow hearts” and rejected the shipment as not coming up to the specifications. When notified of this inspection and rejection, the Quartermaster at Fort Bragg made an inspection of the shipment and concurred in the rejection made by the commissary officer. The high percentage of “hollow hearts ” was the sole ground upon which these officers rejected the shipment. The plaintiff was immediately notified of the rejection and the ground upon which the rejection was made. On June 24, 1929, the Quartermaster began to purchase potatoes in the open market and charged the same to plaintiff’s account. The plaintiff also furnished an additional carload of potatoes to meet the requirements of the order. The total replacement by the plaintiff amounted to 44,375 lbs. for which the plaintiff paid the sum of $875.39, together with freight and handling charges. The plaintiff endeavored to dispose of the rejected carload of potatoes in and around [630] Fort Bragg but was unable to find a market and bad tbe car shipped to Washington, D. C., where it was afterwards disposed of for $198. The total cost to the plaintiff of the potatoes accepted and the potatoes which had been rejected, together with the freight and other charges, amounted to the sum of $1,763.25. Allowing for the $198 received by the plaintiff for the carload of rejected potatoes, plaintiff had a net outlay of $1,565.25.

The defendant has offered to pay for the potatoes delivered and accepted at the contract price, or the sum of $794.31. The plaintiff has refused to accept this amount and has brought suit to recover the entire cost of the rejected and the accepted potatoes, together with charges against its account.

When the car was brought to Washington, D. C., it was inspected by an agent of the Department of Agriculture and a certificate was issued by this inspector stating that the average percentage of “holiow hearts” was 5 per cent; that “other defects, chiefly scab,” averaged 2 per cent; and as to grade, that “stock meets quality requirements for U. S. Grade No. 1, decay and sprouting being factors of condition.”

The contract provided that the potatoes should conform with the Quartermaster Corps Specification No. 22-119A. The pertinent provisions of this specification are:

“No. 2. This specification covers the requirements of Irish potatoes which shall meet the grade requirements of U. S. Grade No. 1 ’ of the Department of Agriculture.
❖ H* * X *
“5. _ Shall _ consist of sound potatoes of round and long varieties which are mature, practically free from dirt or other foreign matter, frost injury, sunburn, second growth, growth cracks, cuts, scabs, blight, soft rot, dry rot, and damage caused by disease, insects, or mechanical or other means. * * *.”

The provision in “IT. S. Grade No. 1” of the Department of Agriculture corresponding to requirement 5 of the Army Specification is as follows:

“U. S._No. 1 shall consist of potatoes of similar varietal characteristics which are not badly misshapen, which are free from freezing injury and soft rot, and from damage caused by dirt or other foreign matter, sunburn, second growth, growth cracks, hollow heart, cuts, scab, blight, dry rot, disease, insects, or mechanical or other means.”

[631] And also—

“In order to allow for variations incident to proper grading and handling, not more than 5 per cent, by weight, of any lot may be below the prescribed size. In addition, not more then 5 per cent, by weight, may be damaged by hollow heart, and not more than 6 per cent may be below the remaining requirements of this grade; but not to exceed one-sixth of this amount, or 1 per cent, shall be allowed for potatoes affected by soft rot.” (Italics ours.)

The corresponding provision of No. 22-119A is:

“In order to allow for variations incident to proper grading and handling, not more than 5 per cent, by weight, of any lot may be below the prescribed size, and, in addition, not more than 6 per cent, by weight, may be below the remaining requirements of this grade, but not to exceed one-third of the 6 per cent tolerance shall be allowed for potatoes affected by soft rot.”

From a casual glance it clearly appears that there is no provision in the requirements of the U. S. A. Quartermaster Specification No. 22-119A in reference to “hollow hearts” but as U. S. Grade No. 1 was made a part of the contract and this grade distinctly sets out the percentage of “hollow hearts” to be “not more than five per cent, by weight, may be damaged by hollow hearts” this percentage would be controlling.

The record is silent as to tbe nature and extent of the inspection made by the commissary officers at Fort Bragg, the testimony of these officers not having been taken; but, the inspection made by the agent of the Department of Agriculture, after the rejected car reached Washington, D. C., shows that the carload of potatoes met the requirements as specified in U. S. Grade No. 1 and the average percentage of “hollow hearts” was 5 per cent.

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

Standard Fish & Produce Co. v. United States, 74 Ct. Cl. 623, 1932 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 441, 1932 WL 2066 (cc 1932).

74 Ct. Cl. 623 (Standard Fish & Produce Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.