T. Smith & Sons, Inc. v. United States

Fifth Circuit

T. Smith & Sons, Inc. v. United States

11 F.2d 1019, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2715

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 8, 1926

DocketNo. 4711

StatusPublished

This text of 11 F.2d 1019 (T. Smith & Sons, Inc. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

T. Smith & Sons, Inc. v. United States, 11 F.2d 1019, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2715 (5th Cir. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decree dismissing appellant’s libel, which alleges that appellant transferred 1,600 tons of coal from the steamer Sahale to barges under an oral contract with a representative of the United States, owner of the steamer, and that the contract price for the work had not been paid.

The position taken by the United States, and sustained by the District Judge upon consideration of the testimony, is that the contract was made not with appellant, but with the Bisso Tow Boat' Company. We are of opinion that a preponderance of the evidence shows that an agent of the Shipping Board employed the towboat company to do the work, and did not authorize it to act for the Shipping Board in making a contract with appellant.

The decree is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decree dismissing appellant’s libel, which alleges that appellant transferred 1,600 tons of coal from the steamer Sahale to barges under an oral contract with a representative of the United States, owner of the steamer, and that the contract price for the work had not been paid.

The position taken by the United States, and sustained by the District Judge upon consideration of the testimony, is that the contract was made not with appellant, but with the Bisso Tow Boat' Company. We are of opinion that a preponderance of the evidence shows that an agent of the Shipping Board employed the towboat company to do the work, and did not authorize it to act for the Shipping Board in making a contract with appellant.

The decree is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 F.2d 1019, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/t-smith-sons-inc-v-united-states-ca5-1926.