Eastport Steamship Corporation v. United States, 399-54.
| Citation | 140 F. Supp. 773 |
| Decision Date | 01 May 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 399-54.,399-54. |
| Parties | EASTPORT STEAMSHIP CORPORATION v. The UNITED STATES. |
| Court | Court of Federal Claims |
J. Franklin Fort, Washington, D. C., Kominers & Fort and Israel Convisser, Washington, D. C., on the briefs, for plaintiff.
Leavenworth Colby, Washington, D. C., with whom was Warren E. Burger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Hubert H. Margolies, Washington, D. C., on the briefs, for defendant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and LITTLETON, WHITAKER, MADDEN and LARAMORE, Judges.
This case is presently before the court on plaintiff's motion to strike defendant's answer and for other relief.
Plaintiff recovered a judgment in this court on June 8, 1954, for $54,097.16, and on August 26, 1954, Congress appropriated funds to pay this judgment. On September 29, 1954, the Comptroller General offset against it the sum of $31,102.71 which he claimed plaintiff owed defendant under a bareboat charter, and paid plaintiff the balance.
Plaintiff then commenced an action in this court on October 7, 1954, to recover the amount withheld. Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff's petition on the ground that this court lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter since the amount withheld was an amount plaintiff owed defendant on a bareboat charter, which defendant alleged was justiciable only in a Court of Admiralty.
We denied defendant's motion to dismiss on April 5, 1955, 130 F.Supp. 333.
Then on April 28, 1955, defendant paid plaintiff the amount which had been withheld, but without interest, and filed an answer to plaintiff's petition setting up the defense of payment in full. Plaintiff then filed a motion to strike defendant's answer as insufficient in law, and for a finding that the previous withholding by defendant was unlawful, and, hence, that plaintiff was entitled to judgment for interest at 6 percent on the amount withheld. Defendant, by leave of the court, filed an amended answer reiterating its defense of payment in full, and, in addition, alleging that a suit had been brought in admiralty against plaintiff to recover the amount previously withheld. Plaintiff's motion will be treated as one to strike the amended answer.
If the amount of $31,102.71 was unlawfully withheld, then under section 227 of 31 U.S.C.A. plaintiff is entitled to interest on it. Plaintiff alleges it was unlawful, and prays for judgment for interest, the amount withheld having been paid after the filing of plaintiff's petition.
As we said in our former opinion, plaintiff's present suit is based on a wrongful withholding of a part of the prior judgment. He can show that this withholding was wrongful only by showing that he is not indebted to the defendant on the bareboat charter, as the Comptroller General alleges. He has invoked this court's jurisdiction to determine this question.
We previously held that plaintiff can maintain his action here, because it is not on a maritime contract, but for a wrongful withholding of a judgment. We held that we have jurisdiction of such a case, although the determination of whether or not the withholding was wrongful necessitates our determination of the amount due on a maritime contract.
Section 227 of 31 U.S.C.A., under which the withholding was made, provides:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Eastport Steamship Corporation
...thirty days to amend its answer, in default of which the Government's liability for interest would be treated as admitted. 140 F.Supp. 773, 135 Ct.Cl. 175. Some time later the Government entered a confession of judgment for the interest Eastport Prior to the confession of judgment but subse......
-
Canned Foods v. United States, 354-55.
... ... The plaintiff, a Wisconsin corporation, made a contract with the Army, dated August 11, 1949, to furnish 46,820 ... ...
-
United States v. EASTPORT STEAMSHIP CORPORATION
...answer alleging the $31,102.71 to have been justifiably withheld because of the charter indebtedness. Eastport Steamship Company v. United States, Ct.Cl.1956, 140 F.Supp. 773. The question of respondent's indebtedness is the very essence of the Court of Claims suit. The similar language in ......
-
Project Map, Inc. v. United States, 31-73.
... ... Cf. Eastport S.S. v. United States, 130 F.Supp. 333, 335, 131 Ct.Cl. 210, 214 (1955) ... 175 (1956). We perceive no inconsistency. Eastport Steamship I involved a disputed debt set off by the Comptroller General against a ... ...