LEHIGH VALLEY RAILROAD CO. ET AL.

v.

DOOLEY

Citator

Cited By

• SAM MacRi & Sons, Inc. v. U. S. A. for the Use of Oaks Constr. Co., 313 F.2d 119 (9th Cir. 1963)
  …ska.1 The language of the contracts in the-cases upon which Macri most- heavily relies (Lichter v. Westinghouse Electric [*125] Mfg. Co., 6 Cir., 1944, 140 F. 2d 597; City of Baton Rouge v. Robinson, 5 Cir., 1942, 127 F. 2d 693, cert. denied, 1942, 317 U.S. 649, 63 S.Ct. 43, 87 L.Ed. 522) does what the language in the present contract does not do, i. e., makes it clear that the unit price provision applies to extra work, not just to variances in quantities of the contract work. What we have said also disp…
• Peter J. Schweitzer, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 144 F.2d 520 (D.C. Cir. 1944)
  …. 128, 118 F. 2d 49, 50, certiorari denied 313 U.S. 567, 61 S.Ct. 942, 85 L.Ed. 1526; National Labor Relations Board v. Federbush Co., 2 Cir., 121 F. 2d 954; National Labor Relations Board v. Stone, 7 Cir., 125 F. 2d 752, 755, 756, certiorari denied 317 U.S. 649, 63 S.Ct. 44, 87 L.Ed. 522. 64 S.Ct. 830, 834. Cf. Southern Colorado Power Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 10 Cir., 111 F. 2d 539; M. H. Ritzwoller Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 7 Cir., 114 F. 2d 432. The Board did not rely upon t…