TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kihlberg v. United States

Frank O. Kihlberg v. United States

Kihlberg v. United States, 14 Ct. Cl. 582 (1878)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
December 23, 1878
Judges
Harlan
Citations
14 Ct. Cl. 582
Syllabus
On the claimant’s Appeal. An Army transportation, contract provides that the trranspwtation shall he paid for according to the distance, “to be ascertained and fixed by tbe obief quartermaster.” The chief quartermaster, without actual measurement, hut hy correspondence with officers, ^-c., fixes the distance at less thorn, the air-tine distance between the places. The claimant is paid accordingly. The contrast also provides that payment shall he made on a certificate of the officer who receives the stores. In transitu, the stores lose weight hy unavoidable shrinkage and leakage. The claimant is paid at the diminished weight. Tie court below bolds: (1) That under tbe provision of tbe contract tbe determination of tbe distance by tbe chief quartermaster was conclusive upon tbe contractor, though erroneous and less than the air-line distance between tbe terminal points of transportation; (á) That where a transportation contract, after relieving tbe contractor from responsibility for unavoidable leakage and shrinkage, provides that payment shall he made on the receiving officer’s certificate, “ stating the quantity and condition of the stores delivered,” the contractor, though without fault, cannot recover freight earnings on the quantity received hy him for transportation, hut only on the quantity delivered hy him after leakage and shrinkage. Judgment accordingly. The claimant appeals. The judgment of the court helow is affirmed, and on precisely the same grounds.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Harlan

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Mr. Justice Harlan

delivered tbe opinion of tbe Supreme Court, December 23, 1878.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2000: 12005: 12009: 120002026peak 2000 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Tecom, Inc. v. United States66 Fed. Cl. 736 (Fed. Cl. 2005)
  2. Libertatia Associates, Inc. v. United States46 Fed. Cl. 702 (Fed. Cl. 2000)
  3. Todd Construction, L.P. v. United States88 Fed. Cl. 235 (Fed. Cl. 2009)

Most recent

  1. Todd Construction, L.P. v. United States88 Fed. Cl. 235 (Fed. Cl. 2009)
  2. Tecom, Inc. v. United States66 Fed. Cl. 736 (Fed. Cl. 2005)
  3. Libertatia Associates, Inc. v. United States46 Fed. Cl. 702 (Fed. Cl. 2000)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list