Opinion

Hongkong & Whampoa Dock Co. v. United States

  • 50 Ct. Cl. 213
  • 1915 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 89
  • 1915 WL 1085
Court
United States Court of Claims
Filed
Apr 12, 1915
Status
Published
Author
Atkinson
On the bench
Atkinson, Barney, Booth, Campbell
Cited by
6 cases

The opinion

Atkinson, Judge,

dissenting:

I can not agree with the majority decision of the court, for the reason that section 1 of the two contracts in the case provides for the “completion and delivery” of the lorchas at Manila, P. I., at certain specific dates; and section 2 provides, further, that liquidated damages at $20 per day (which is not unreasonable in a contract of the magnitude of the instant case) may be assessed against the contractor for each and every day for failure to comply therewith. Were it not for this latter provision in the contracts the claimant company could use its own pleasure in the delivery of the barges, and thus force the Government to prove actual damages caused by such failure. The petition therefore should be dismissed, and judgment should be entered for the United States.

Other reasons for nonconcurrence could be given, but X deem this one sufficient.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.