TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Morgan

United States v. Samuel J. Morgan

United States v. Morgan, 154 U.S. 565 (1869)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
April 12, 1869
Docket
No. 191
Judges
Nelson
Citations
154 U.S. 56514 S. Ct. 121319 L. Ed. 2561869 U.S. LEXIS 1092
Summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP- CLAIMS. The case is stated in the opinion.

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

Opinion — Nelson

Mr. Justice Nelson delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from the Court of Claims.

The petition in this case sets forth that Morgan, under a con-: tract with the government, in September, 1861, purchased five hundred and twenty-two horses, for which he was to receive $130 each; that the government has refused to pay the price according to the contract, and that a balance remains of $7830. Thi,s contract was made with the petitioner by Reeside, an agent of General Fremont, who had been authorized to purchase two thousand horses for his military department, at the price above stated.

The claim was presented to the board of commissioners appointed to' investigate contracts made in this department, and, after an examination into the claim, it was reduced $7830, the board allowing only $115 per head for the horses instead of $130, the contract price; and gave to the claimant a voucher for the amount at this rate, $60,076, payment of which was afterwards accepted by him from the government.

The Court of Claims decreed in his favor the contract price, deducting the above payment. The case falls within the decision of The United States v. Adams, and this decree must, therefore, be reversed.

The case is remanded with directions to dismiss the petition.

How later courts describe this case

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

1925: 219252026peak 1925 · 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