United States v. C.G. Blake Co.
| Decision Date | 07 February 1922 |
| Citation | 279 F. 71 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. C. G. BLAKE CO. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Allen C. Roudebush, Asst. U.S. Atty., of Cincinnati, Ohio (James R Clark, U.S. Atty., of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Howard W. Ameli Asst. Atty. Gen., on the brief), for the United States.
Murray Seasongood, of Cincinnati, Ohio, for defendant in error.
Before DENISON and DONAHUE, Circuit Judges, and COCHRAN, District judge.
This case was tried before the district judge, without a jury. The record compels the inference that there was no written waiver of jury pursuant to R.S. Sec. 649 (Comp. St. Sec. 1587), and therefore that the trial was not had pursuant to R.S. Sec 700 (Comp. St. Sec. 1668). There seems to have been an express waiver of jury, but it was oral, in open court, and special findings of fact and of law were made and filed by the judge. The bill of exceptions and the assignments of error present questions of the admission and exclusion of evidence; but pursuant to the citation and discussion of authorities found in our opinion in Cleveland v. Walsh Const. Co., 279 F. 57 (this day decided), we conclude that we must be limited to the inquiry whether the facts specially found support the judgment. However, this conclusion is less restrictive than usual, because the questions of evidence develop and merge into the same questions which arise on the interpretation of the findings. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the District Court, found in 275 F. 861, and need not be now repeated.
The tenth finding of facts is:
'In asking of the defendant $5.60 per gross ton the plaintiff asks the same price that it received from others in the general market, and not more but less than the prevailing market price.' This is followed by the conclusion of law that $5.60 per ton constitutes that 'just compensation' which the statute contemplates. This we take to be equivalent to saying that, under the facts of this case, plaintiff's standard prices to its regular customers constituted that market value which is just compensation. The reasoning which leads to this conclusion is set out in Judge Peck's opinion, which makes clear the sense in which 'market value' is used in the findings, and which we approve and adopt in this case-- with only the following possible exception:
Counsel think the opinion logically leads to the conclusion that any price which plaintiff could have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American-Hawaiian SS Co. v. United States
...275 F. 861. Both of these do seem to do so; and we affirmed the first in, 2 Cir., 281 F. 754, and the Sixth Circuit affirmed the second in 279 F. 71. However, we regarded ourselves as bound by the findings of the trial judge, and did not pass upon the merits. The per curiam opinion of the S......
-
King v. United States
...v. United Air Lines, Inc., 224 F.Supp. 341, 344 (W.D.Pa.1963); Blake Co. v. United States, 275 F. 861, 863 (S.D.Ohio 1921), aff'd, 279 F. 71 (6th Cir. 1922); Agency of Canadian Car & Foundry Co. v. Pennsylvania Iron Works Co., 256 F. 339, 347 (3d Cir. 1919); The H. F. Dimock, 77 F. 226 (1st......
-
Emor, Inc. v. Cyprus Mines Corporation, Civ. A. No. 68-821.
...565, 67 L.Ed. 1014 (1923), affirming 276 F. 690 (3d Cir. 1921); C. G. Blake Co. v. United States, 275 F. 861 (S.D.Ohio 1921), aff'd 279 F. 71 (6th Cir. 1922). 16 Subsequent to the closing $114,164 was delivered to Alcoa, the total expenses being 17 Prior to the execution of the Sales Agreem......
-
United States v. Delano Park Homes, 77.
...D. C., 275 F. 861. Both of these do seem to do so; and we affirmed the first in 281 F. 754, and the Sixth Circuit affirmed the second in 279 F. 71. However, we regarded ourselves as bound by the findings of the trial judge, and did not pass upon the merits. The per curiam opinion of the Six......