UNITED GAS & ELECTRIC ENGINEERING CORPORATION

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Memphis Light, 358 U.S. 103 (U.S. 1958)
  …ince as a matter of law rate changes ordered by the Commission after a § 5 (a) proceeding would have been incorporated into the agreements, Northern Pacific R. Co. v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co., 4 F. 2d 359 (C. A. 9th Cir. 1925), appeal dismissed, 269 U. S. 535; Market Street R. Co. v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 6 F. 2d 633 (D. C. N. D. Cal. 1925), appeal dismissed, 271 U. S. 691; and (3) the “industrial” rates of United have consistently been below its other rates, the force of respondents’ contention is…
• Union Petroleum S. S. Co. v. United States, 18 F.2d 752 (2d Cir. 1927)
  …ire output of a steel company, thereby depriving it of the means to perform its contract to deliver steel plate to the Omnia Company, gave the promisee no right to compensation from the government. In Berg v. United States, 59 Ct. Cl. 462, affirmed, 269 U. S. 535, 46 S. Ct. 100, 70 L. Ed. 399, it was held that a broker, who had negotiated a charter party between, an owner and a third person, had no claim against the United States, even though the United States, after requisition of the vessel, made a substit…
• United States v. Union Petroleum S. S. Co. (S.D.N.Y. 1926)
  …C. A. 330]. Indeed the claim is not even of maritime cognizance. Richard v. Hogarth [D. C.] 94 F. 684.” Furthermore, I fail to see .wherein the present case differs in principle from that which was before the Supreme Court in Berg v. United States, 269 U. S. 535, 46 S. Ct. 100, 70 L. Ed.-, and which was ruled by Omnia Commercial Co., Inc., v. United States, 261 U. S. 502, 43 S. Ct. 437, 67 L. Ed. 773. [4] In addition to what has gone before, I may say that, from a technical standpoint, the defendant’s paym…

Authorities Cited

• Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. v. United States, 261 U.S. 592 (U.S. 1923)
• Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. v. United States, 261 U.S. 385 (U.S. 1923)