United States v. GLASS-COCK
| Decision Date | 05 May 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 140.,140. |
| Citation | 27 F. Supp. 534 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES, for Use and Benefit of TOBIN QUARRIES, Inc., v. GLASS-COCK et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
Roy W. Crimm, of Kansas City, Mo., and Otto O. Fickeissen, of St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Sullivan, Reeder & Finley, and W. O. Reeder, of St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
The facts are simple and not seriously disputed. Glasscock entered into a contract with the United States to perform certain government work on the Missouri River in this district. The defendant Continental Casualty Company executed a bond for the faithful performance of the contract and the payment of bills for materials. See 40 U.S.C.A. §§ 270a, 270b, 270c and 270d. Plaintiff furnished certain materials to the contractor which went into the project covered by the bond. Those materials were not paid for. This action is upon that bond to recover the value of those materials. The only question involved is whether the action was brought within the period of one year "after the date of final settlement of such contract". Subsection (b) Sec. 270b, Title 40, U.S.C.A. Plaintiff secured and offered in evidence a certificate from the Comptroller General certifying the date of final settlement of the contract as February 1, 1938. This suit was brought January 30, 1939.
Plaintiff relies upon the conclusiveness of the Comptroller General's certificate as to the date of final settlement. Section 270c, Title 40, U.S.C.A.: "The Comptroller General is authorized and directed to furnish * * * a certified statement of the date of such settlement, which shall be conclusive as to such date upon the parties."
Defendants assert that the project was completed and accepted prior to Jan. 30, 1938, offer evidence, received contingently, to support those assertions and insist that in fact final settlement was made on January 22, 1938. It appears that final payment was made February 1, 1938. No fraud or mistake on the part of the Comptroller General is alleged.
Defendants seek to avoid the conclusive effect of the Comptroller General's certificate as to the date of final settlement by asserting that the clause of Sec. 270c, supra, making the certificate conclusive as to date of final settlement is unconstitutional. The ground of unconstitutionality assigned is that this legislative Act invades the judicial prerogative to determine questions of fact.
The defendants are in no position to question the validity of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States Fidelity & Guar. Co. v. Hendry Corporation
...rel. and for Use and Benefit of Korosh v. Otis Williams & Co., D. Idaho, 1939, 30 F.Supp. 590; United States for Use and Benefit of Tobin Quarries, Inc. v. Glasscock, E.D.Mo.1939, 27 F.Supp. 534. There is no claim of fraud or bad faith in this case. The problem here is that the Comptroller ......
-
United States v. Fleisher Engineering & Constr. Co.
...995; R. P. Farnsworth & Co. v. Electrical Supply Co., 5 Cir., 112 F.2d 150, 130 A.L.R. 192; United States for Use and Benefit of Tobin Quarries, Inc., v. Glasscock et al., D.C., 27 F.Supp. 534; United States ex rel. for Use and Benefit of Korosh v. Otis Williams & Co., D.C., 30 F.Supp. 590.......
-
Travis Equipment Co. v. D & L Construction Co. & Associates
...to the 1959 amendment to the Miller Act. As stated by Judge Collet in United States for Use and Benefit of Tobin Quarries, Inc. v. Glasscock, E.D. Mo.1939, 27 F.Supp. 534, 535, that amendment "must be read into the bond and its provisions treated as a part of the original No plaintiff has a......
-
United States v. Otis Williams & Co.
...such to have existed. This question was recently decided in the case of United States, for Use and Benefit of Tobin Quarries, Inc., v. Glasscock et al., D.C., 27 F.Supp. 534, 535, where the Court stated: "Defendants assert that the project was completed and accepted prior to Jan. 30, 1938, ......