Scully v. United States
Decision Date | 27 April 1912 |
Docket Number | 1,017. |
Citation | 197 F. 327 |
Parties | SCULLY v. UNITED STATES. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Nevada |
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
This action was brought to recover $9,932.85, of which $5,189.85 is alleged to be due on contract for surveying certain public lands in central Nevada, and the remainder, $4,743, is claimed for loss of time and interest. The contract is dated September 26, 1900. It was made by Dennis Scully, the plaintiff, acting for himself, and the United States Surveyor General for Nevada, acting in behalf of the United States. It provided that Scully in his own proper person should survey mark, and establish 'all lines necessary to fully complete the survey of township No. 14 N., range No. 41 E townships 17 and 18 N., range No. 43 E., townships 17, 18 and 19 N., range No. 44 E., and township No. 18 N., range 45 E Mount Diablo Meridian'; that all should be done 'in strict conformity with the laws of the United States, the printed Manual of Surveying Instructions as revised and approved June 30, 1894, and other surveying instructions issued by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, and with such special instructions as he may receive from the said Surveyor General in conformity therewith (all of said instructions to be taken and deemed a part of this contract).' The estimated liability was fixed at $3,000. The compensation was fixed 'by the Treasury Department of the United States, as a full compensation for all work performed under this agreement, at the rate of nine (9) dollars for base, standard, meridian, and meander lines, seven (7) dollars for township lines, and five (5) dollars for section and connecting lines, except where the lines of survey pass over mountainous lands, or lands heavily timbered, or covered with dense undergrowth, and in such case at the rate of thirteen (13) dollars for base, standard, meridian and meander lines, eleven (11) dollars for township lines, and seven (7) dollars for section and connecting lines, per mile, for every mile and part of a mile actually run and marked in the field, random lines and offsets not included.'
It was required that the surveys should be completed and true field notes thereof returned to the office of said Surveyor General on or before September 1, 1901, on penalty of forfeiture and payment to the United States of the sum of $6,000 (secured by bond), in case Scully failed to perform the contract according to its terms. This time was later extended. Further stipulations of the contract were as follows:
The Manual of 1894, referred to in the contract, and made a part thereof, contains full and minute directions relative to surveys. These directions must be observed by Surveyors General, their assistants, and deputy surveyors. On page 65 of the Manual, the following rule is set out:
Pursuant to this rule, the Surveyor General, October 3, 1900, sent Mr. Scully some 10 pages of instructions, copies of which are attached to the answer. Among these instructions was the following: Prior to the actual survey, Mr. Scully, with a full corps of assistants, at his own expense, made a preliminary recognizance to ascertain the actual condition of boundaries and corners which were to be the starting or closing points of his work, so that 'he might obtain beforehand needed instructions. In a letter dated March 5, 1901, to the Surveyor General, he reported these conditions. The Surveyor General acknowledged receipt of this letter March 8th, thanked Scully for his 'information as to the condition of the monuments of former surveys in the territory covered by your contract, No. 225,' and said: 'This will be of value hereafter as showing the necessity of such retracements and resurveys as you will have to make.'
On March 31, 1901, Scully communicated with the Surveyor General, detailing conditions in township 19 N., range 44 E., township 18 N., range 45 E., township 17 N., range 44 E., and township 18 N., range 43 E., and again asked instructions as to resurveys and retracements. The Surveyor General, April 4, 1901, replied in part, as follows:
April 27, 1900, Scully informed the Surveyor General of the conditions in township 17 N., range 44 E., and township 17 N., range 45 E. He described the absence of monuments, the irregularity in measurements, and the unreliability of the field notes of the old surveys. Inasmuch as he was obliged to connect with interior corners of township 17 N., range 44 E and 'as after long search no interior corners could be found for three miles on any range of sections, ' he 'simply had to resubdivide.' He described his methods of subdivision, and concluded thus: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Holly Sugar Corporation v. Fritzler
...after the other has acted, deny that understanding to the other's loss." They cite Brent v. Lilly Co., (C. C.) 174 F. 877; Scully v. U.S. (D. C.) 197 F. 327; Grunden-Martin Mfg. Co. v. Christy, 22 Ariz. 196 P. 454. The principle so stated is applicable in the proper case. Space forbids us t......
-
United States v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co.
...(C.C.) 44 F. 405; United States v. Barber, 74 F. 483, 20 C.C.A. 616; United States v. Sargent, 162 F. 81, 89 C.C.A. 81; Scully v. United States (D.C.) 197 F. 327. In cases before District Courts, arising under special acts of Congress, generally in admiralty cases (Watts v. United States (D......
-
American Vulcanized Fibre Company v. Saulsbury
... ... M. Ry. Co. v. W. U. Tel. Co., 118 F. 497, at 516; ... Brent v. Lilly Co., 174 F. 877; Scully v ... U.S. 197 F. 327, at 343 ... The ... language of the proposition to the effect ... ...
-
State v. Wright
...102 N. E. 880;Covington v. South, etc., Co. (1912) 147 Ky. 326, 144 S. W. 17;Chicago v. Sheldon, 9 Wall. 50, 19 L. Ed. 594;Scully v. United States (D. C.) 197 F. 327; Donelly, Law of Public Contracts, § 170. The contract, plans, and specifications authorized the engineer to make alterations......