E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Cudd. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Cudd.

E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Cudd‪.‬

1949.C10.40060 176 F.2D 855

    • $9.00
    • $9.00

Descripción editorial

The United States, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, prepared plans and specifications for the development of an irrigation district in the vicinity of Altus, Oklahoma. The program contemplated the letting of contracts to private contractors for the construction of different parts of the canals, ditches, bridges, culverts, flumes, and other structures. A contract was entered into with Barney W. Harrell and May T. Stebbins, partners composing the firm Stebbins Construction Company, hereinafter referred to as Stebbins, to construct the Ozark Canal, and the bridges, culverts, and other structures incident to its construction. The structures were to be of concrete, reinforced with steel. Stebbins entered into a contract with Robberson Steel Company, hereinafter referred to as Robberson, to furnish the steel required for the structures, estimated at two hundred and forty tons. The contract was dated March 18, 1947. It provided that delivery of steel should begin ninety days from that date and should be completed in six months from the date set for the initial delivery, and it further provided that invoices rendered for steel shipped were due in thirty days from the invoice date. Later Stebbins entered into another contract with Robberson for the bending of the steel. A list of the various concrete structures to be built in the canal, the amount of steel required for each, and the desired sequence of delivery of the steel was delivered to Robberson. Robberson was advised that Stebbins planned to commence the concrete work for which steel was required on June 18th, and that it would be agreeable for Robberson to make delivery of steel prior to that time. After being so advised, Robberson informed Stebbins by letter dated June 13th that it had scheduled shipment of the steel for the first eight structures in the shipping schedule for the first of the following week. But a disagreement arose between the parties in respect to a transaction in which Robberson furnished to Stebbins steel for the construction of a bridge in Cherokee County, Oklahoma, and Robberson refused to ship any steel for use on the Ozark Canal Job until such controversy had been settled. Stebbins wrote Robberson under date of July 1st. After making reference to the original contract, to the plan to start the concrete work on June 18th, and to the refusal of Robberson to make shipment of steel until the dispute arising out of the furnishing of steel for the bridge job had been settled, the letter read, "It is requested that shipment of steel bars be made in accordance with our contract within ten days from date, otherwise should there be any additional expense, or liquidated damages, due to your failure to perform, we will hold you fully responsible." The first carload of steel was shipped on July 11th; the second on September 6th; the third on September 18th; and the fourth on October 9th. Payment was made for the first carload. Invoices for the second, third, and fourth carloads were not paid. Payment for the second and third carloads not having been made within thirty days of their receipt, Robberson notified Stebbins that it elected to cancel the contract by reason of the breach. Stebbins accepted the cancellation but notified Robberson that it would be held liable for all damages occasioned by the failure to make further deliveries. Stebbins thereafter purchased steel elsewhere to complete the job at a price in excess of that fixed in the contract with Robberson.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1949
8 de septiembre
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
12
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENDEDOR
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
63.5
KB

Más libros de United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit

Gage Products Co. v. Henkel Corporation Gage Products Co. v. Henkel Corporation
2004
United States v. Bellamy United States v. Bellamy
2005
Palladium Music, Inc. v. Eatsleepmusic Palladium Music, Inc. v. Eatsleepmusic
2005
E.Spire Communications, Inc. v. New Mexico Public Regulation Commission E.Spire Communications, Inc. v. New Mexico Public Regulation Commission
2004
Young v. Workman Young v. Workman
2004
Johnson v. Lodge #93 of the Fraternal Order of Police Johnson v. Lodge #93 of the Fraternal Order of Police
2004