Fleischmann Const. Co. v. United States to Use of G. W. Forsberg
| Decision Date | 10 March 1924 |
| Docket Number | 2196. |
| Citation | 298 F. 330 |
| Parties | FLEISCHMANN CONST. CO. and National Surety Company, Plaintiffs in Error, v. UNITED STATES, to Use of G. W. FORSBERG, Henry A. Kries & Sons, Wallace & Gale, Warren Webster Co., Hersey Mfg. Co., Walworth Mfg. Co., Albert T. Otto & Sons, Inc., S. S. Glassgold & Co., Carroll Electric Co., Pierce, Butler & Pierce, Structural Slate Co., Wade Iron Sanitary Mfg. Co., Boston (or Beaton) Cadwell Mfg. Co., Worthington Pump & Machinery Co., Columbus Brass Co., Goulds Mfg. Co., Dimock & Fink, Savage Exp. Bolt Corp., E. G. Schafer & Co., and McNab & Harlin, Defendants in Error. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria; D. Lawrence Groner, Judge.
Levi H. David, of Washington, D.C., and William F. Kimber, of New York City (Caton & Caton, of Alexandria, Va., on brief), for plaintiffs in error.
Bynum E. Hinton, of Washington, D.C., for defendants in error.
Before WOODS and ROSE, Circuit Judges, and WEBB, District Judge.
The defendants in error insist that there is nothing before this court because exceptions were not duly taken. The point is serious, but we prefer to rest the affirmance of the judgment on the merits. We think the District Court (298 F. 320) was clearly right on all the points decided, and that nothing of substance can be added to the reasoning of the court.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fleischmann Const Co v. United States Forsberg, 50
...in the suit. The plaintiff and the intervenors recovered judgment, 298 F. 320, which was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals, 298 F. 330. This writ of error was allowed in March, 1924. A motion was interposed to dismiss the writ of error upon the ground that the record presents no ques......
-
First Nat. Bank of San Rafael v. Philippine Refining Corp.
...for like reason, as made before the entry of the judgment. "The Circuit Court of Appeals disposed of the case in a per curiam opinion 298 F. 330 stating that, while there was a serious question whether there was anything before it because of the want of due exceptions, it preferred to rest ......
-
United States v. Morley Const. Co.
...without regard to the date when the work was completed. United States v. Fleischmann Const. Co. (D.C.) 298 F. 320, affirmed (C. C.A.) 298 F. 330, affirmed 270 U.S. 349, 46 S.Ct. 284, 70 L.Ed. 624. The term "final settlement," as used in the statute, denotes the date of final administrative ......
-
Golden West Construction Company v. United States, 6780.
...244 U.S. 376, 37 S.Ct. 614, 61 L.Ed. 1206; United States to Use of Forsberg v. Fleischmann Construction Co., D.C., 298 F. 320, affirmed 4 Cir., 298 F. 330, affirmed 270 U.S. 349, 46 S.Ct. 284, 70 L.Ed. 624; United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 236 U.S. 512, 35 S.Ct. 298, ......