Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 41 results (0.077 seconds)

Oct 04 2005 (SC)

State of Rajasthan Vs. Nav Bharat Construction Company

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-04-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC4430; 2005(3)ARBLR429(SC); JT2005(9)SC173; (2005)3MLJ85(SC); 2005(8)SCALE372; (2006)1SCC86

..... and for the observance of the regulations aforesaid without prejudice to his right to claim indemnity from his sub-contract.(f) the regulations aforesaid shall be deemed to be part of this contract and breach thereof shall be deemed to be breach of contract.'special conditions of the contract inter-alia provide as follows:'31 labour conditions:-(a) the contractor shall comply with ..... workmanship, or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, rights, matter, or thing whatsoever in any way arising out of, or relating to, the contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions, order, these conditions or otherwise concerning the works, or the execution or failure to execute the same, whether arising during the progress of ..... the local situation regarding materials, labour and other factors pertaining to the work before submitting this order. 2. i/we carefully studied the n.i.t. conditions of contract, specification, additional instructions, general rules and directions and other documents related to this work and i/we agree to execute the work accordingly.i/we do hereby tender for ..... the work was not completed within this time and time was extended. it appears that the work was not completed within the extended time also. the appellants terminated the contract and got the balance work completed from some other contractor. the respondent raised various claims which were rejected by the appellants. the respondent, therefore, moved an application under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2005 (FN)

Castle Rock Vs. Gonzales

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-27-2005

..... , but the court nevertheless refused to treat that entitlement as a property interest within the meaning of the due process clause. footnote 19 as the analogy to a private security contract demonstrates, a person s interest in police enforcement has some ascertainable monetary value, ante , at 17. cf. merrill, the landscape of constitutional property, 86 va. l. rev. 885, 964, n ..... with a private firm.[ footnote 19 ] the fact that it is based on a statutory enactment and a judicial order entered for her special protection, rather than on a formal contract, does not provide a principled basis for refusing to consider it property worthy of constitutional protection.[ footnote 20 ] v because respondent had a property interest in the enforcement of the ..... of the due process clause. if a colorado statute enacted for her benefit, or a valid order entered by a colorado judge, created the functional equivalent of such a private contract by granting respondent an entitlement to mandatory individual protection by the local police force, that state-created right would also qualify as property entitled to constitutional protection. i do not ..... the statute could be said to make enforcement mandatory, that would not necessarily mean that respondent has an entitlement to enforcement. her alleged interest stems not from common law or contract, but only from a state s statutory scheme. if she was given a statutory entitlement, the court would expect to see some indication of that in the statute itself. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 2005 (FN)

Cherokee Nation of OklA. Vs. Leavitt

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-01-2005

..... sufficient funds, and that, in this instance, congress failed to do so. the government in effect concedes yet more. it does not deny that, were these contracts ordinary procurement contracts, its promises to pay would be legally binding. the tribes point out that each year congress appropriated far more than the amounts here at issue (between $1. ..... restrictive language exists, the earlier statutes unambiguously provided unrestricted lump-sum appropriations. nor should 314 be interpreted to retroactively bar payment of claims arising under 1994 through 1997 contracts. that would raise serious constitutional issues by undoing binding governmental contractual obligations. thus, the court adopts the interpretation that congress intended to forbid the indian health service ..... to 314 of the later-enacted 1999 appropriations act, which states that amounts earmarked in committee reports for the indian health service [for] payments to tribes for contract support costs are the total amounts available for fiscal years 1994 through 1998 for such purposes. the court rejects the government s claims that this statute merely clarifies ..... make the government s promise nonbinding, since the relevant appropriations contained unrestricted funds sufficient to pay the claims at issue. when this happens in an ordinary procurement contract case, the government admits that the contractor is entitled to payment even if the agency has allocated the funds to another purpose. that the government used the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 2005 (FN)

Spector Vs. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-06-2005

..... and ceases to carry american passengers. this is again much like the situation presented in benz and mcculloch , where the application of american labor laws would have continued to govern contracts between foreign shipowners and their foreign crews well beyond their time in our waters. the purpose of the internal order clear-statement requirement is to avoid casually subjecting oceangoing vessels .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 2005 (FN)

Gonzales Vs. Raich

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-06-2005

..... so far as to declare this question irrelevant. it asserts that the csa is constitutional even if california s current controls are effective, because state action can neither expand nor contract congress powers. ante , at 27, n. 38. the majority s assertion is misleading. regardless of state action, congress has the power to regulate intrastate economic activities that substantially affect interstate ..... , at 20, and finally to all production, distribution, and consumption of goods or services for which there is an established interstate market, ante , at 23. federal power expands, but never contracts, with each new locution. the majority is not interpreting the commerce clause, but rewriting it. the majority s rewriting of the commerce clause seems to be rooted in the belief .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 2005 (FN)

Granholm Vs. Heald

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-16-2005

granholm v. heald - 03-1116 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 granholm v. heald supreme court of the united states granholm, governor of michigan, et al. v. heald et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit no. 03 1116.argued december 7, 2004 decided may 16, 2005 michigan and new york regulate the sale and importation of wine through three-tier systems requiring separate licenses for producers, wholesalers, and retailers. these schemes allow in-state, but not out-of-state, wineries to make direct sales to consumers. this differential treatment explicitly discriminates against interstate commerce by limiting the emerging and significant direct-sale business. influenced by an increasing number of small wineries and a decreasing number of wine wholesalers, direct sales have grown because small wineries may not produce enough wine or have sufficient consumer demand for their wine to make it economical for wholesalers to carry their products. in nos. 03 1116 and 03 1120, michigan residents, joined by an intervening out-of-state winery, sued michigan officials, claiming that the state s laws violate the commerce clause. the state and an intervening in-state wholesalers association responded that the direct-shipment ban was a valid exercise of michigan s power under the twenty-first amendment. the district court sustained the scheme, but the sixth circuit reversed, rejecting the argument that the twenty-first amendment immunizes state liquor laws .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 2005 (FN)

Smith Vs. City of Jackson

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-30-2005

smith v. city of jackson - 03-1160 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 smith v. city of jackson supreme court of the united states smith et al. v. city of jackson, mississippi, et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit no. 03 1160.argued november 3, 2004 decided march 30, 2005 in revising its employee pay plan, respondent city granted raises to all police officers and police dispatchers in an attempt to bring their starting salaries up to the regional average. officers with less than five years service received proportionately greater raises than those with more seniority, and most officers over 40 had more than five years of service. petitioners, a group of older officers, filed suit under the age discrimination in employment act of 1967 (adea), claiming, inter alia, that they were adversely affected by the plan because of their age. the district court granted the city summary judgment. affirming, the fifth circuit ruled that disparate-impact claims are categorically unavailable under the adea, but it assumed that the facts alleged by petitioners would entitle them to relief under griggs v. duke power co., 401 u. s. 424 , which announced a disparate-impact theory of recovery for cases brought under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 (title vii). held: the judgment is affirmed. 351 f. 3d 183, affirmed. justice stevens delivered the opinion of the court with respect to parts i, ii, and iv, concluding: 1. the adea authorizes recovery .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 2005 (FN)

Jackson Vs. Birmingham Bd. of Ed.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-29-2005

..... that they could be liable for the conduct at issue, davis , supra , at 640. when congress enacts legislation under its spending power, that legislation is in the nature of a contract: in return for federal funds, the states agree to comply with federally imposed conditions. pennhurst state school and hospital v. halderman , 451 u. s. 1 , 17 (1981). as we have ..... recognized, [t]here can be no knowing acceptance [of the terms of the contract] if a state is unaware of the conditions [imposed by the legislation on its receipt of funds]. ibid . the board insists that we should not interpret title ix to prohibit ..... court has repeatedly held that the obligations congress imposes on states in spending power legislation must be clear. such legislation is in the nature of a contract and funding recipients acceptance of the terms of that contract must be voluntar[y] and knowin[g]. pennhurst state school and hospital v. halderman, 451 u. s. 1 , 17 (1981); see also barnes v. gorman .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2005 (FN)

Orff Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-23-2005

..... suits directly against the united states, as opposed to joinder of the united states as a necessary party defendant to permit a complete adjudication of rights under a reclamation contract. we therefore affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. it is so ordered. footnote 1 westlands subsequently intervened on appeal. footnote 2 the district court invited petitioners ..... example, the tucker act grants the united states court of federal claims jurisdiction to render judgment upon any claim against the united states founded . . . upon any express or implied contract with the united states. 28 u. s. c. 1491(a)(1).[ footnote 2 ] the little tucker act grants district courts original jurisdiction, concurrent with the court of federal claims ..... insufficient to waive sovereign immunity. section 390uu grants consent to join the united states as a necessary party defendant in any suit to adjudicate certain rights under a federal reclamation contract. (emphasis added.) this language is best interpreted to grant consent to join the united states in an action between other parties for example, two water districts, or ..... california state water resources control board. see california, supra, at 652, and n. 7. the bureau distributes the water in accordance with its statutory and contractual obligations. it contracts with state irrigation districts to deliver water and to receive reimbursement for the costs of constructing, operating, and maintaining the works. in 1963, the united states agreed to a 40 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 2005 (FN)

Graham County Soil and Water Conservation Dist. Vs. United States Ex R ...

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-20-2005

..... committed refer to the date on which the suspected violation occurs. i recognize that there is a relevant distinction in this case. in the typical case (say, the tort or contract case) the plaintiff must ultimately prove all the relevant allegations. here, the retaliation victim need not prove that her employer did in fact violate federal false claims law, but only ..... to alleged events. thus, a plaintiff s tort action is timely if he files it within, say, three years of the alleged negligently caused injury; a plaintiff s breach-of-contract action is timely if filed within, say, one year of the alleged breach. and a plaintiff who loses such an action because the defendant shows, say, that there was no .....

Tag this Judgment!


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