SCHAUMBURG
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1880-10-01
103 U.S. 667 Supreme Court of the United States (1880) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 26 L. Ed. 599 · 1880 U.S. LEXIS 2171 · SCDB 1880-196
Cited by 18 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Schaumburg, a former military officer, sued the United States for unpaid military pay and emoluments accrued between 1836 and 1845, which exceeded the government's counterclaim debt against him. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for the defendant, holding that while credits for military pay may be used to reduce or extinguish debts owed to the government, they cannot form the basis for a judgment against the United States itself.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chiee Justice Waite

Mr. Chiee Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the-court.

The judgment in this case is affirmed on the authority of United States v. Eckford, 6 Wall.

484. Claims for credit can be used in suits against persons indebted to the United States to reduce or extinguish the debt, but not as the foundation of a judgment' against the government. In the present case the court instructed the jury as matter of law that the plaintiff in error, from July 1, 1836, until March 24, 1845, was in the military service of the United States as a first lieutenant of dragoons or cavalry; and that he was entitled as such to credit for the pay and emoluments that accrued during that period, and this was admitted to exceed the debt sued on by the United States.

The jury thereupon brought in a verdict for the defendant. Had the jury gone further and struck the balance that would be due from the United States, no judgment could have been rendered for it. Any verdict, therefore, beyond .the one actually given would have been fruitless. The court itself decided that the plaintiff in error was entitled to his pay and emoluments from July 1, 1836, to March 24, 1845. While sometimes the jury have been permitted to certify to a balance they find to be due from the government in cases of this kind, and under some circumstances it may be proper they should do so, ¿.refusal of the court to direct that it be done cannot be reviewed here.

Judgment affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Shaw de Bonis Non, 309 U.S. 495 (U.S. 1940)
    …opeller Co. v. United States, 300 U. S. 475, 478; Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, 304 U. S. 126, 134. Williams v. United States, 289 U. S. 553, 564. 6 Wall. 484, 491. Cf. Reeside v. Walker, 11 How. 272, 290. Cf. Schaumburg v. United States, 103 U. S. 667. 49 Stat. 1987: “Sec. 203. The United States Shipping Board Merchant Fleet Corporation shall cease to exist and shall stand dissolved. All the records, books, papers, and corporate property of said dissolved corporation shall be taken over by the…
  • Wirth Ltd. & Hoesch Siegerlandwerke A. G. Siegen v. S/S Acadia Forest & Lash Barge No. CG-204, 537 F.2d 1272 (5th Cir. 1976)
    …applied. This court and other federal courts repeatedly have held that such a combination constitutes, in law, one vessel. See The Northern Belle (The Keokuk v. Home Ins. Co.) 9 Wall. 526, 528, 529, 19 L.Ed. 746, 747; The Civilta, 103 U.S. 699, 701, 26 L.Ed. 599, 600; The Nettie Quill [5 Cir., 124 F. 667] supra; The Columbia [9 Cir.], 44 U.S.App. 326, 73 F. 226, 19 C.C.A. 436; The Seven Bells, 241 F. 43, 45, 154 C.C.A. 43; The Fred W. Chase [4 Cir.], (D.C.) 31 F. 91, 95; The Bordentown (D.C.), 40 F. 682, 68…
  • United States v. Skinner & Eddy Corp. (W.D. Wash. 1928)
    …the principal, and the prin [*378] cipal may sue thereon.2 The defendant is not deprived of establishing any credit on striking a balance on just demands. United States v. Eckford, 73 U. S. (6 Wall.) 484, 18 L. Ed. 920; Schaumburg v. United States, 103 U. S. 667, 26 L. Ed. 599. Lease or Contract of Sale. During the early part of 1918 the Seattle Construction & Dry Dock Company was the owner of a shipyard in the city of Seattle immediately adjacent to the defendant’s yard, and was constructing 10 ships for…
    1 / 2

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw