Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 1972 Page 1 of about 52 results (0.055 seconds)

Feb 23 1972 (FN)

United States Vs. Generes

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-23-1972

..... gross business for the period 1954 through 1962. in 1962, the corporation seriously underbid two projects and defaulted in its performance of the project contracts. it proved necessary for maryland to complete the work. maryland then sought indemnity from generes and kelly. the taxpayer indemnified maryland to the extent of $162,104.57. in the same year, he also loaned ..... time basis. his total income was about $40,000 a year. he advanced money to the corporation and signed an indemnity agreement with a bonding company, which furnished bid and performance bonds for the construction contracts. the corporation defaulted on contracts in 1962, and the taxpayer advanced over $158,000 to the corporation and indemnified the bonding company to the extent ..... most of these were obtained from maryland casualty co. that underwriter required the taxpayer and kelly to sign an indemnity agreement for each bond it issued for the corporation. in 1958, however, in order to eliminate the need for individual indemnity contracts, taxpayer and kelly signed a blanket agreement with maryland whereby they agreed to indemnify it, up to a designated ..... as well, even though the non-qualifying motivation was the primary one." [ footnote 7 ] "you must, in short, determine whether mr. generes' dominant motivation in signing the indemnity agreement was to protect his salary and status as an employee or was to protect his investment in the kelly generes construction co." "mr. generes is entitled to prevail in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 1972 (SC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Sri Sarada Mills Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-28-1972

Reported in : AIR1973SC281; [1973]43CompCas431(SC); (1972)2SCC877; [1973]2SCR464

..... is a money or any other benefit received which ought to be taken into account in diminishing the loss or in ascertaining what the real loss is against which the contract of indemnity is given, the indemnifier ought to be allowed to take advantage of it in order to circulate what the real loss is.' 36. so the only term to be ..... application of the doctrine of subrogation to policies of marine insurance is based upon the fundamental principle that the contract of insurance contained in a marine policy is a contract of indemnity, and of indemnity only. 33. the expression 'subrogation', in relation to a contract of marine insurance is no more than a convenient way of referring to those terms which are to be implied ..... indemnified. 34. the right of the insurer against the person responsible for the loss, does not rest upon any relation of contract or of privity between them. it arises out of the nature of the contract of marine insurance as a contract of indemnity, and is derived from the assured alone, and can be enforced in his right only. 35. sub-section (1) of ..... . 333, 339. said: the general rule of law (and it is obvious justice) is that where there is a contract of indemnity (it matters not whether it is a marine policy, or a policy against fire on land, or any other contract of indemnity) and a loss happens, anything which reduces or diminishes that loss reduces or diminishes the amount which the indemnifier is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1972 (SC)

M.N. Gangappa (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Atmakur Nagabhushanam Setty and Co. a ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-21-1972

Reported in : AIR1972SC696; (1973)3SCC406; 1972(4)LC539(SC)

..... find any such infirmities in the reasoning of the two courts particularly with regard to the surrounding circumstances and other evidence which showed that the contracts were non-transferable.9. the only other question which has been agitated relates to the quantum of damages. it is common ground that ..... to the conclusion that the obligation to supply the bags was on the plaintiff.4. the goods which were the subject-matter of the contracts were of expeller quality which reinforced the view that they were intended for the oil expelling business of the plaintiff.8. after a careful ..... groundnut seeds in those bags supported the plaintiff's case that actual delivery of goods was contemplated.(iv) there was overwhelming evidence that the contracts were genuine and true transactions intending delivery of goods and that the defendants plea that the parties intended only to pay or receive the difference ..... appeal to the high court. the high court gave the following findings:(i) the groundnut seeds which were agreed to be supplied by the two contracts were of 'expeller quality' which was used for extracting oil, the other variety being 'company quality' which was used for the purpose of export ..... called upon to take delivery of the empty gunny bags by giving an indemnity bond to the railway authorities. the defendants sent a telegram in reply saying that the transaction in question was of a 'satta forward contract and was illegal and uninforceable'. this was followed by other telegrams which need .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1972 (FN)

S and E Contractors, Inc. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-24-1972

..... . is to overcome the effect of the supreme court decision . . . under which the decisions of government officers rendered pursuant to the standard disputes clauses in government contracts are held to be final absent fraud on the part of such government officers." ". . . the proposed legislation also prescribes fair and uniform standards for the judicial review ..... general, expanded on the report in his testimony before the subcommittee. he asserted that, prior to wunderlich, disputes clause decisions on questions of fact arising under government contracts "were not disturbed by the general accounting office or the courts unless the action of the administrative officer was fraudulent, arbitrary, capricious, grossly erroneous, or without ..... of the right it had under wunderlich to challenge "fraudulent" disputes decisions. the principal government procurement agencies, now including the atomic energy commission, have created contract appeals boards as the final level of agency review of disputes decisions. because the act expressly provides for judicial review of such "board" decisions, interpreting it ..... never had -- to upset an administrative decision which it [found] 'grossly erroneous' or 'not supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence.'" schultz, proposed changes in government contract disputes settlement: the legislative battle over the wunderlich case, 67 harv.l.rev. 217, 243 (1953). the house of representatives rejected this provision, however, and the wunderlich .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 1972 (FN)

Furman Vs. Georgia

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-29-1972

furman v. georgia - 408 u.s. 238 (1972) u.s. supreme court furman v. georgia, 408 u.s. 238 (1972) furman v. georgia no. 69-5003 argued january 17, 1972 decided june 29, 1972 * 408 u.s. 238 certiorari to the supreme court of georgia syllabus imposition and carrying out of death penalty in these cases held to constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of eighth and fourteenth amendments. no. 69-5003, 225 ga. 253, 167 s.d.2d 628; no. 69-5030, 225 ga. 790, 171 s.d.2d 501; no. 69-5031, 447 s.w.2d 932, reversed and remanded. page 408 u. s. 239 per curiam. petitioner in no. 69-5003 was convicted of murder in georgia, and was sentenced to death pursuant to ga.code ann. 26-1005 (supp. 1971) (effective prior to july 1, 1969). 225 ga. 253, 167 s.e.2d 628 (1969). petitioner in no. 69-5030 was convicted of rape in georgia, and was sentenced to death pursuant to ga.code ann. 26-1302 (supp. 1971) (effective prior to july 1, 1969). 225 ga. 790, 171 s.d.2d 501 (1969). petitioner in no. 69-5031 was convicted of rape in texas, and was sentenced to death pursuant to tex.penal code, art. 1189 (1961). 447 s.w.2d 932 (ct.crim.app. 1969). certiorari was granted limited to the following question: "does the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty in [these cases] constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth and fourteenth amendments?" 403 u.s. 952 (1971). the court holds that the imposition page 408 u. s. 240 and carrying out of the death penalty in these .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 1972 (FN)

Pipefitters Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-22-1972

pipefitters v. united states - 407 u.s. 385 (1972) u.s. supreme court pipefitters v. united states, 407 u.s. 385 (1972) pipefitters local union no. 562 v. united states no. 70-74 argued january 11, 1972 decided june 22, 1972 407 u.s. 385 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eighth circuit syllabus petitioner union and three of its officers were convicted of conspiracy to violate 18 u.s.c. 610, which prohibited a labor organization from making a contribution or an expenditure in connection with a federal election. evidence indicated that the union, from 1949 through 1962, maintained a political fund to which union members and others working under the union's jurisdiction were required to contribute, and that that fund was then succeeded by the present fund, which was, in form, set up as a separate "voluntary" organization; union officials, nevertheless, retained unlimited control over the fund, and no significant change was made in the regular and systematic collection of contributions at a prescribed rate based on hours worked; union agents, moreover, continued to collect donations at jobsites on union time, and the proceeds were used for a variety of purposes, including political contributions in connection with federal elections; those contributions, on the other hand, were made from accounts strictly segregated from union dues and assessments, and, although some of the contributors believed otherwise, donations to the fund were not, in fact, necessary .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 1972 (FN)

Port of Portland Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-29-1972

..... milwaukee cars have been reaching peninsula since march 22, 1971, though it is plain that milwaukee trains have not been moving directly to the north portland interchange. [ footnote 13 ] the contract here referred to is a 1966 agreement between milwaukee and the northern lines, the terms of which were incorporated in large part into the commission's conditions accompanying the approval ..... industries have now located on the willamette river side. [ footnote 3 ] sp&s; and up had already provided for joint ownership of such a spur in their may 26, 1967, contract for the joint ownership of the line between barnes yard and the southwestern part of rivergate. see art. xi of this agreement, app. 313. [ footnote 4 ] the agreed purchase price ..... located on the lines of peninsula terminal company. with fifty per cent of peninsula terminal company stock in the hands of union pacific railroad company, not a party to the contract referred to above, milwaukee will not have any right similar to that sought by applicants herein . . . to operate over or obtain trackage rights in the lines of peninsula terminal company ..... joint application filed with the interstate commerce commission on july 2, 1967, sp&s; and up sought approval, under 5(2) of the interstate commerce act, [ footnote 5 ] of their contracted purchase of peninsula page 408 u. s. 818 from united stockyards. the application pointed out that the acquisition would enable the applicants to provide rail service to the adjacent rivergate .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 1972 (FN)

Andrews Vs. Louisville and Nashville R. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-15-1972

..... v. central airlines, 372 u. s. 682 (1963), an agreement required under 204 of the railway labor act was said to be "like the labor management relations act 301 contract . . . , a federal contract, and . . . therefore governed and enforceable by federal law in the federal courts." 372 u.s. at 372 u. s. 692 . a similar result was reached under ..... the statutory source of this procedure lies in its inflexibility and immunity from modification through collective bargaining. unlike the maddox rule, what is done today cannot be undone tomorrow through contract negotiation. [ footnote 6 ] that difference would seem to warrant caution to ensure that more is to be gained than lost by closing the courthouse door. one clear ..... to govern agreements under 301 of the labor management relations act, into which exclusive arbitration clauses may voluntarily be inserted by the parties and the substantive law to govern railroad contracts, onto which the statutory grievance procedure is superimposed by law. one would not suppose that every doctrine developed under the labor management relations act, 61 stat. 136, ..... mandatory provisions for the processing of grievances. petitioner argues that his election to sever his connection with the employer and treat the latter's alleged breach of the employment contract as a "discharge" renders his claim sufficiently different from the normal disputes over the interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement to warrant carving out an exception to the otherwise .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 1972 (FN)

United States Vs. United States Dist. Ct.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-19-1972

..... 407 u. s. 308 one could hardly expect a clearer expression of congressional neutrality. the debate above explicitly indicates that nothing in 2511(3) was intended to expand or to contract or to define whatever presidential surveillance powers existed in matters affecting the national security. if we could accept the government's characterization of 2511(3) as a congressionally prescribed exception ..... 45% were incriminating. 117 cong.rec. 14052. [ footnote 15 ] 114 cong.rec. 14750. the subsequent assurances, quoted in part i of the opinion, that 2511(3) implied no statutory grant, contraction, or definition of presidential power eased the senator's misgivings. [ footnote 16 ] this view has not been accepted. in chimel v. california, 395 u. s. 752 (1969), the court considered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 1972 (FN)

The Bremen Vs. Zapata Off-shore Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-12-1972

..... affidavit of a managing director of unterweser stating that unterweser considered the choice of forum provision to be of "overriding importance" to the transaction. he stated that unterweser towage contracts ordinarily provide for exclusive german jurisdiction and application of german law, but that, "[i]n this instance, in an effort to meet [zapata] half-way, [unterweser] ..... zapata had solicited bids for the towage, and several companies, including unterweser, had responded. unterweser was the low bidder and zapata requested it to submit a contract, which it did. the contract submitted by unterweser contained the following provision, which is at issue in this case: "any dispute arising must be treated before the london court of justice. " ..... the court of appeals. in november, 1967, respondent zapata, a houston-based american corporation, contracted with petitioner unterweser, a german corporation, to tow zapata's ocean-going, self-elevating drilling rig chaparral from louisiana to a point off ravenna, italy, in the adriatic sea, ..... certiorari to review a judgment of the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit declining to enforce a forum selection clause governing disputes arising under an international towage contract between petitioners and respondent. the circuits have differed in their approach to such clauses. [ footnote 1 ] for the reasons stated hereafter, we vacate the judgment of .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //