Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: old Court: us supreme court Year: 1940 Page 1 of about 33 results (0.054 seconds)

Dec 16 1940 (FN)

United States Vs. Northern Pacific Ry. Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-16-1940

..... government is entitled to prove, if it can, any damage to it, or advantage to the company, which resulted from this breach of contract. p. 311 u. s. 368 . 20. the company's right to receive patents for indemnity lands outside of the reserves for which selections were filed with the department of the interior prior to june 5, 1924, cannot be ..... 1870 embodied an offer that, if the company would construct and operate the railroad, it should receive the granted lands; that this offer had ripened into a contract by the company's acceptance and performance; that the promise of indemnity for granted lands not available to the company was a vested right protected from destruction; that, though the lands in the ..... . paragraph xxviii of the complaint refers to the act of february 26, 1895, [ footnote 32 ] providing for the examination and classification, as mineral or non-mineral, of place and indemnity lands within four land districts in idaho and montana; recites the appointment and functioning of the commissions authorized by the act; alleges that the commissioners undertook to classify approximately 11 ..... lands available for selection only non-mineral surveyed vacant land. the company asserts that, in this, the court was right. the government insists that vacant unsurveyed lands were "available" as indemnity to the company notwithstanding the concession that, as lands selected must be identified, the company cannot select them until they have been so identified by survey. [ footnote 18 ] it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1940 (FN)

Deputy Vs. Du Pont

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-08-1940

..... court of appeals, 103 f.2d 257, with which i agree. the taxpayer borrowed stock in order to sell it for cash to others. his contract obligated him either to return the stock or to pay the carrying charges to the lender. what he paid was not technically interest, but it ..... footnote 10 ] respondent refers to the mutuum in roman law. ledlie's sohm's institutes of roman law, 2d ed., p. 395; hare, the law of contracts, p. 73. [ footnote 11 ] this makes irrelevant other lines of authority cited by respondent where "interest" in a different context has been used to describe damages ..... 227. it said, p. 284 u. s. 560 , " . . . as respects interest,' the usual import of the term is the amount which one has contracted to pay for the use of borrowed money." page 308 u. s. 498 it there rejected the contention that it meant "effective interest" within the theory of accounting, ..... 6 ] therefore, he arranged for a loan from the delaware company of the number of shares necessary to discharge that obligation. [ footnote 7 ] under a contract with that company, respondent agreed to return in kind the number of shares loaned (plus any increase by stock dividend or otherwise) within ten years; to pay ..... obligation, an obligation is not necessarily an "indebtedness" within the meaning of 23(b). interest in its usual import is the amount which one has contracted to pay for the use of borrowed money. in the business world, interest on indebtedness means compensation for the use or forbearance of money. it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1940 (FN)

James Stewart and Co. Vs. Sadrakula

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-29-1940

..... 2 of a nevada consent statute, laws nev.1935, c. 142, was clearly incompatible with exclusive jurisdiction. the section read: "in the erection of such federal building by contract or otherwise, or in case of any subsequent reconstruction or alteration of such building, it is hereby reserved and provided that the state labor laws, the state labor safety laws ..... and the appellant reading, "state or municipal building regulations do not apply to work inside the government's lot lines." [ footnote 24 ] while, of course, in a sense, the contract is the means by which the united states secures the construction of its post office, certainly the contractor in this independent operation does not share any governmental immunity. [ footnote 25 ..... the safety provisions of maryland law which, in baltimore & annapolis railroad v. lichtenberg, [ footnote 23 ] were held applicable to trucks of an independent contractor transporting government employees under a contract with the united states. page 309 u. s. 105 finally, the point is made that a provision requiring boarding over of open steel tiers in a direct interference with the ..... the argument that a similar increased cost from taxation would "make it difficult or impossible" for the government to obtain the service it needs, we said in james v. dravo contracting co. [ footnote 22 ] that such a contention "ignores the power of congress to protect the performance of the functions of the national government and to prevent interference therewith .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 1940 (FN)

Mcgoldrick Vs. Berwind-white Coal Mining Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-29-1940

..... than numerous other state taxes which have repeatedly been sustained as involving no prohibited regulation of interstate commerce. in two instances already noted, respondent's contracts with austin, nichols & co., and with the new england steamship company call for delivery of the coal at points outside of new york, in ..... have no different effect upon it than has the present sales tax upon goods whose shipment interstate into the taxing state was contemplated when the contract was entered into. it is also urged that the conclusion which we reach is inconsistent with the long line of decisions of this court ..... sale was upheld. but we have sustained the tax where the course of business and the agreement for sale plainly contemplated the shipment interstate in fulfillment of the contract. wiloil corp. v. pennsylvania, supra, 294 u. s. 173 ; graybar electric co. v. curry, supra. in the same circumstances, the court ..... are brought from other states to any greater burden or affects it more, in any economic or practical way, whether the purchase order or contract precedes or follows the interstate shipment. since the tax applies only if a sale is made, and in either case the object of interstate ..... l. ry. co. v. wallace, supra; henneford v. silas mason co., supra. respondent, pointing to the course of its business and to its contracts which contemplate the shipment of the coal interstate upon orders of the new york customers, insists that a distinction is to be taken between a tax laid on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1940 (FN)

Deitrick Vs. Greaney

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-12-1940

..... : "an examination of the pleadings makes it quite clear that the receiver undertook to set up rights acquired by the insolvent bank through duly executed contracts between it and the surety company. he makes no suggestion of a purpose attributable to the company to mislead creditors or others; makes no allegations ..... the suit was merely one to recover assets of the bank, and that the declarations stated no cause of action other than that arising from the contract of suretyship. the court called attention to the fact that the pleadings contained no allegation that the receiver based his action on any alleged deception of ..... , nor be the purchaser or holder of any such shares, unless such security or purchase shall be necessary to prevent loss upon a debt previously contracted in good faith, and stock so purchased or acquired shall, within six months from the time of its purchase, be sold or disposed of at ..... , 295 u. s. 209 , or that the receiver has not shown that the creditors have been deceived or specifically injured as the result of the illegal contract. cf. mount vernon trust co. v. bergoff, supra, 196. it is the evil tendency of the prohibited acts at page 309 u. s. 199 ..... the bank's officers were participants in the illegal transaction, and that the receiver has not shown that creditors were deceived or specifically injured as the result of the illegal contract. rankin v. city national bank, 208 u. s. 541 , and deitrick v. standard surety co., 303 u. s. 471 , distinguished. p. 309 u .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1940 (FN)

Labor Board Vs. Waterman Steamship Corp.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-12-1940

..... ; to make whole and offer full reinstatement to those employees found to have suffered discrimination, and to post appropriate notices on the waterman vessels. [ footnote 5 ] in part, that contract reads: "section 1. it is understood and agreed that, as vacancies occur, members of the international seamen's union of america who are citizens of the united states, shall be ..... or condition of employment" [ footnote 9 ] because of union activity or affiliation. these words are not limited so as to outlaw discrimination only where there is in existence a formal contract or relation of employment between employer and employee. they embrace, as well, as elements of the employment relationship which in fact customarily attend employment and with respect to which an ..... tenure and customary term or condition of employment, of course, no vacancies occurred when the men of the "bienville" and the "fairland" signed off articles in mobile. and respondent's contract with the isu, which only provided preferential treatment of the isu (afl) in filling vacancies, did not require the company to discharge the nmu (cio) men from these ships. ..... employment and employment relationship of these men were at an end. from this premise, the company insists that vacancies were created as the men signed off and, under an outstanding contract with the isu, preference in filling these vacancies had to be given to members of the isu unless contractual obligations were to be violated. [ footnote 5 ] however, page 309 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1940 (FN)

Mayo Vs. Lakeland Highlands Canning Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-26-1940

..... milk control board v. eisenberg farm products co., 306 u. s. 346 . nor is there substantial basis for appellees' contention that the order unconstitutionally impairs the obligation of any contracts they may have previously made for the purchase of grapefruit at a price lower than that fixed under the statute. see, e.g., union dry goods co. v. georgia public ..... omitted so to do. the record does not warrant a judgment of dismissal. the complaint raises constitutional questions of due process, equal protection, and violation of the obligation of contract. it further raises questions as to whether the act has ever been put into operation in accordance with its terms. the appellees' principal attack upon the statute, based upon ..... equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment, because discriminating between cooperatives and the complainants, as taking their property without due process of law, and as impairing the obligation of contracts. the bill also challenges the regulation on the ground that the commission failed to ascertain, in accordance with the law, that fifty percent of the owners or controllers of ..... products in florida begins about november 1st of each year and continues until june or july of the following year; that preparations for canning include the ordering of cans, labels, contracting for purchase of fruit, securing labor, planning of factory operations, and obtaining orders for the product. it is alleged that, under the growers' cost guarantee act, the appellant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1940 (FN)

Utility Workers Vs. Consolidated Edison Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-26-1940

utility workers v. consolidated edison co. - 309 u.s. 261 (1940) u.s. supreme court utility workers v. consolidated edison co., 309 u.s. 261 (1940) amalgamated utility workers v. consolidated edison co. no. 342 argued january 31, 1940 decided february 26, 1940 309 u.s. 261 certiorari to the circuit court of appeals for the second circuit syllabus under the national labor relations act, the authority to apply to the circuit court of appeals to have an employer adjudged in contempt for failure to obey a decree enforcing an order of the national labor relations board lies exclusively in the board itself, acting as a public agency. a labor organization has no standing to make such an application in virtue of having filed the charges upon which the board's proceedings were initiated. p. 309 u. s. 269 . 106 f.2d 991 affirmed. certiorari, 308 u.s. 541, to review the denial of an application for a contempt order. mr. chief justice hughes delivered the opinion of the court. the national labor relations board ordered the consolidated edison company of new york and its affiliated companies to desist from certain labor practices page 309 u. s. 262 found to be unfair and to take certain affirmative action. the circuit court of appeals granted the board's petition for enforcement of the order, and its decree, as modified, was affirmed by this court. consolidated edison co. v. labor board, 305 u. s. 197 . petitioner, amalgamated utility workers, brought the present proceeding before the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1940 (FN)

Puerto Rico Vs. Rubert Hermanos, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-25-1940

..... , within a term of not more than six months counting from the date on which final sentence is rendered." "in every case, alienation or confiscation shall be through the corresponding indemnity as established in the law of eminent domain." [ footnote 2 ] 3 of the joint resolution provides: "no corporation shall be authorized to conduct the business of buying and selling real ..... warranto in the name of the puerto rico; or whenever any corporation, by itself or through any other subsidiary or affiliated entity or agent, exercises rights, performs acts, or makes contracts in violation of the express provisions of the organic act of puerto rico or of any of its statutes, the attorney general or any district attorney, either on his own .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 1940 (FN)

Maurer Vs. Hamilton

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-22-1940

..... , preservation of records, qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees, and safety of operation and equipment." subdivision (2) imposes a like duty upon the commission to regulate "contract carriers." subdivision (3) imposes the duty "to establish for private carriers of property by motor vehicle, if need therefor is found, reasonable requirements to promote safety of operation, ..... operations of such vehicles should be forbidden. the safety regulations heretofore prescribed by us, of course, apply to these as well as other vehicles operated by common and contract carriers in interstate or foreign commerce. the operations of vehicles so equipped are therefore permitted by the existing regulations, and there is no need for change." (p. 132 ..... commission, purporting to act under the motor carrier act, had promulgated regulations effective july 1, 1936, with respect to "safety of operation and equipment" of common and contract motor carriers in interstate commerce, subject to the act. these regulations contained no provisions specifically applicable to cars carried over the cab of the carrier vehicle. on march 11 ..... federal motor carrier act empowers the interstate commerce commission to establish reasonable requirements with respect to "safety of operation and equipment" of motor vehicles of common and contract carriers in interstate commerce, but its authority with respect to sizes and weights of vehicles is expressly limited in 225 to investigation and report on the need of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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