Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: old Court: us supreme court Year: 1923 Page 1 of about 44 results (0.072 seconds)

Dec 10 1923 (FN)

Arnold Vs. GuimarIn and Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-10-1923

..... no appearance by them in the circuit court of appeals. [ footnote 4 ] the circuit court of appeals, after disposing, adversely to arnold and the indemnity company, of various assignments of error relating to the alleged prematurity of the suit and the claim of guimarin & co., said: "considering the action to ..... ] the case was then tried upon the issues relating to the claim of guimarin & co., and a verdict rendered by direction, finding that arnold's contract had been completely performed and finally settled on april 16, 1920, and that guimarin & co. was entitled to recover under its subcontract $7,693.31, ..... on the bond. the defendants answered, denying liability on page 263 u. s. 430 various grounds, specifically denying that arnold's contract had been finally settled on april 17, or that more than six months had elapsed since its completion or final settlement, and averring that the ..... to be due it from arnold under a subcontract for supplying the plumbing and other material in the storehouse. the complaint alleged that arnold's contract with the united states had been completely performed and finally settled on april 17, 1920, and that the united states had not entered suit ..... the writ. the materialmen's act, as amended, provides [ footnote 1 ] that the usual penal bond executed by anyone entering into a contract with the united states for the construction of any public work shall contain an additional obligation for the payment by the contractor of all persons supplying .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 02 1923 (FN)

Galveston Wharf Co. Vs. Galveston

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-02-1923

..... brooklyn, 166 u. s. 685 ; pennsylvania hospital v. philadelphia, 245 u. s. 20 . these cases not only dispose of the objection based upon the contract, but also show the difference between an attempt to transfer property from one private person to another and the taking it for public administration by a public body. 166 ..... it says can be taken more fairly if the city wishes to start municipal wharves. without going into greater detail, we will assume that the alleged contract was made and bound the city, and that its terms will be departed from if the city should exercise the new power. the bill alleges ..... all to be inalienable except by a four-fifths vote of all the qualified voters. this was confirmed by the legislature in 1870. there was a later contract of march 9, 1905, not now material except that it again confirmed the decree of 1869, and has been performed up to the date of the ..... judicial code), 238, 36 stat. 1087, 1157, amended by act of january 28, 1915, c. 22, 2, 38 stat. 803, 804. the bill alleges a contract embodied by consent in a decree of april 1, 1869, that compromised a suit brought by the city against the present plaintiff, the galveston wharf company, plaintiff in error, ..... district court of the united states for the southern district of texas syllabus 1. the power of eminent domain cannot be contracted away, and a contract of that kind is not within the protection of the contract clause of the federal constitution. p. 260 u. s. 476 . 2. a bill relying on the contrary .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1923 (FN)

Ftc Vs. Curtis Publishing Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-08-1923

..... paragraph violate 3, act of october 15, 1914. and it thereupon ordered: that the respondent cease and desist, while engaged in interstate commerce, from entering into any contracts, agreements or understandings which forbid persons, partnerships or corporations already engaged in the sale or distribution of magazines or news papers, or both, of other publishers from acting ..... in the course of said commerce, with those of respondent, which permission as to said competing publications has been uniformly denied by respondent; that, in enforcing said contract provision as to said dealers, and in denying them said permission, respondent has prevented and now prevents certain of its competitors from utilizing established channels for the general ..... . after taking much testimony -- 2,500 pages -- the commission made a brief and rather vague report of two pages, containing findings and conclusions based on the second contract with dealers and without direct reference to the earlier one. the substance of the report follows: paragraph one. respondent, a pennsylvania corporation with principal place of business at philadelphia ..... of certain competitors to other dealers or distributors. that, with the same intent, purpose, and effect, it is making and for several months last past has made contracts with numerous wholesalers to distribute its periodicals as agents, and not to distribute those of other publishers without permission. that wholesalers so restricted are the principal and often the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1923 (FN)

Oklahoma Vs. Texas

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-15-1923

..... respect to treaties that they shall be liberally construed so as to carry out the apparent intention of the parties to secure equality and reciprocity between them. as they are contracts between independent nations, in their construction, words are to be taken in their ordinary meaning, as understood in the public law of nations, and not in any artificial or special ..... denotes the relation of the boundary to the rivers, and, as those words are otherwise supported, they point with controlling force to what was in the minds of the high contracting parties. it follows from these considerations that the meaning of the treaty provision is just what it would be if the red river section of the boundary were expressly described ..... the said rivers roxo and arkansas, throughout the extent of the said boundary, on their respective banks, shall be common to the respective inhabitants of both nations." "the two high contracting parties agree to cede and renounce all their rights, claims, and pretensions, to the territories described by the said line; that is to say: the united states hereby cede to ..... having the approval of the entire court. the court said: "in making such construction, it is necessary to keep in mind that there was by the contract of cession a mutual relinquishment of claims by the contracting parties, the united states ceding to georgia all its right, page 260 u. s. 631 title, etc., to the territory lying east of that line .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 1923 (FN)

Lee Vs. Chesapeake and Ohio Ry. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-22-1923

..... dependent on the will or acquiescence of the plaintiff. the opinion in in re moore is qualified accordingly. we recognize that one purpose of the act of 1888 was to contract the jurisdiction of the circuit courts, and that due regard should be had for this in interpreting indefinite or ambiguous provisions; but we think it affords no basis for subtracting ..... ruling proceeded on the theory that this was a right, if not a necessary, conclusion, inasmuch as the general purpose of congress in adopting the act of 1888 was to contract the jurisdiction of the circuit courts. the decision was given in 1906, and was a departure from what had been said of the same provisions in prior cases, notably mexican ..... wisner, 203 u. s. 449 , overruled; in re moore, 209 u. s. 490 , qualified. 6. the purpose of the act of august 13, 1888, c. 866, 25 stat. 433, to contract the jurisdiction of the circuit courts affords no basis for subtracting from its provisions where definite and free from ambiguity. p. 260 u. s. 660 . affirmed. error to a judgment ..... defendant only where he was a nonresident of the state in which the suit was brought. thus, while the comparison shows that congress intended to contract materially the jurisdiction on removal, it also shows how the contraction was to be page 260 u. s. 661 effected. certainly there is nothing in this which suggests that the plain terms in the act of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1923 (FN)

Leigh Ellis and Co. Vs. Davis

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-29-1923

..... understood or allowed to contravene our conclusion, upon the facts here. the statutes of the states where the goods were shipped and the suit was brought do not affect the contract, and the reasonableness of the limitation is a matter of law; missouri, kansas & texas ry. co. v. harriman, 227 u. s. 657 , 227 u ..... 114 s.e. 365; northern milling co. v. davis, (wis.) 190 n.w. 351. in our opinion, this contract was good when made. the time allowed was reasonable. missouri, kansas & texas ry. co. v. harriman, 227 u. s. 657 , 227 u. s. 672 ; texas & pacific ry ..... the general purpose was to limit not to extend rights of action, and that we page 260 u. s. 689 cannot suppose that it was intended to invalidate existing contracts good when made. new york central r. co. v. lazarus, 278 f. 900; william f. mosser co. v. payne, director general, (w.va.) ..... ." the district court, after careful consideration, dismissed the petition upon demurrer on the ground that the suit was too late under the quoted words of the contract, and also on the merits. 274 f. 443. the circuit court of appeals affirmed the judgment, adopting the opinion below as to the time within which ..... . the reasonableness of such a limitation is a matter of law. p. 260 u. s. 689 . 5. when not affected by statute, a limitation prescribed by contract like the above applies to the action which is prosecuted to judgment, and is not extended by the bringing of a previous action. p. 260 u. s. 689 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1923 (FN)

Conley Vs. Barton

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-29-1923

..... complementary. in the first, an alteration of the remedy was sustained; in the second, the remedy was adjudged so intimate in its relation to the contract as to be within its obligation and immunity from change. the first is the reliance of defendant in error; the second, of plaintiff in error. ..... contain a one-year foreclosure covenant, which the court denominated "the familiar form." the conclusion was that such "foreclosure clause" was "not a contract contemplated and protected by the constitution," and further that the act related to the remedy for the enforcement of rights, and that, while an ..... all foreclosures begun after its passage including foreclosures of prior existing mortgages." in reply to the contention that the statute impairs the obligation of the contract constituted by the mortgage "by extending the foreclosure period for three months after the expiration of the year," it was said: "but the ..... to redemption; plaintiff in error asserts that it is inapplicable, and contends that, if held applicable, it is invalid as impairing the obligation of his contract, the mortgage. page 260 u. s. 680 the trial court decided that the provision was applicable and valid. these conclusions were affirmed by the ..... january 29, 1923 260 u.s. 677 error to the supreme judicial court of the state of maine syllabus the obligation of a mortgage contract under which the right of redemption is barred after lapse of one year from entry and taking possession by the mortgagee to foreclose, is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1923 (FN)

Charles Nelson Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-19-1923

..... completing our engagements." the court of claims further found that "no protest against furnishing more than 1,675,000 feet of lumber under the contract was ever made by the plaintiff company or any of its officers," and the seventh finding was as follows: "the plaintiff company furnished ..... department, washington, d.c., in which you are instructed as follows:" " contract 28942, if contractor fails to make delivery, purchase authorized as requested." "may we be permitted to state that it has never been our intention ..... that he was acting within his authority in so doing. on june 18th the plaintiff company wrote the supply officer as follows: "dear sir: contract 28942. we have for acknowledgment your letter of the 14th, in which you transmit instructions received from the bureau of supplies and accounts, navy ..... named during the period ending december 31, 1917, irrespective of the estimated quantity named, the government not being obligated to order any specific quantity of douglas fir contracted for." then follows: " class 5 -- continued" " stock classification no. 39" "fir, douglas, as follows:" "1. 1,675,000 feet b.m ..... no. 287 argued january 25, 26, 1923 decided february 19, 1923 261 u.s. 17 appeal from the court of claims syllabus a contract for furnishing lumber to the government at a specified price contained a clause obliging the contractor to deliver any quantities ordered in a certain period .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1923 (FN)

Columbia Railway, Gas and Elec. Co. Vs. South Carolina

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-19-1923

..... . if this requirement nevertheless be construed as a condition subsequent, there can be no rational ground for holding that the other obligations of the contract are not susceptible of a like construction. among these obligations is that requiring the completion of the canal to gervais street in two years, ..... of 3 of said act, instituted this action. the sufficiency of the complaint was challenged by demurrer upon the ground, among others, that the contract in question was impaired by the act of 1917. the demurrer having been overruled, an answer was filed alleging such impairment, and this claim was ..... upon these facts, this court has jurisdiction, and it is its duty to determine for itself the existence, construction, and validity of the alleged contract, and also to determine whether, as construed by this court, it has been impaired by any subsequent state legislation to which effect has been given ..... jurisdiction, and this must first be considered. the judgment of the state court, it is asserted, was based upon its own construction of the contract, and not at all upon the act of 1917. as this court has repeatedly ruled, the constitution affords no protection as against an impairment by ..... "sell, alienate and transfer" the property subject "to all the duties and liabilities imposed thereby [that is, by the act of 1887], and subject to all contracts, liabilities and obligations made and entered into by said board. . . ." acts s.car. 1890, p. 967, 2. under this statute, the canal was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1923 (FN)

Paducah Vs. Paducah Railway Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-19-1923

..... . 273 , and cases there cited. the company was entitled to just compensation -- i.e., a reasonable return on the value of its property used in the public service -- and, unless contracted away, that right is protected by constitutional safeguards which may not be overridden by legislative enactment or considerations of public policy. southern iowa electric co. v. city of chariton, 255 ..... only contention is that, under the franchise, the company has no right at any time to have fares in excess of those specified in that section, and, because of the contract, it may not invoke constitutional protection against the enforcement of the specified rates, even if shown to be too low to yield a reasonable return. page 261 u. s. 272 ..... complaint. the city offered no evidence, and made no serious contention that the rates fixed in the ordinance complained of were sufficient, but insisted that the franchise ordinance was a contract binding the company to the fares specified in section xv as the maximum never to be exceeded during the twenty-year term. the district court held that the franchise fixed ..... railway company has a constitutional right to a reasonable return on the value of its property used in the public service if it has not contracted the right away. p. 261 u. s. 272 . 3. a contract between a city and a street railway company considered and construed as fixing fares for the first year of operation under it, but as leaving .....

Tag this Judgment!


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