TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Murphy v. United States

Murphy v. United States, 104 U.S. 464 (1882)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
January 16, 1882
Docket
No. 745
Judges
Waite
Citations
104 U.S. 46426 L. Ed. 8331881 U.S. LEXIS 2026
Headnotes
A,claim against the United States for damages which a contractor alleged he had sustained was, by the appropriate department, adjusted upon a basis to which he agreed. He accepted the sum allowed, and gave a receipt therefor in full. Held, that the acceptance of the sum is a bar to his suit for the same claim.
Summary
Appeal from the Court of Claims. ■Murphy entered into a written contract with‘the United States.for excavating a portion of the pit for a dry dock, and was paid-at'the contract price for all the work which he performed. He subsequently presented to the Navy Department a claim ■for damages suffered by reason of certain alleged violations of the contract, and for extra work. The department adopted a basis of adjustment, to which he agreed; and there was paid to him a certain sum, which, upon full information as to the principles upon which it was awarded, he- accepted, and gave a ■receipt in full. • He some time thereafter brought suit in the court below for the same claim, adding, however, a further item, of which there was no proof.' The court dismissed the petition, and he appealed.

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

Opinion — Waite

Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.

■ We are clearly of the opinion that the acceptance by the claimant, without objection, of the amount allowed b.y the Secretary of the Navy, in his adjustment of the account presented to him, was equivalent to a final ¿ettlement arid compromise of all the items of the present claim included in that account. There is nothing in the findings of the court below to warrant a judgment in favor of the claimant upon the only item *465 included in the petition in this case which was not mentioned specifically in the account presented to the Secretary of the Navy and passed on by him in the adjustment he made.

Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 14 cases

View all citing references →
1894: 11897: 11901: 11902: 21905: 11908: 21909: 11925: 21944: 11958: 218942026peak 1902 · 2

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