CHODORSKI

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (31 total)

• United States v. Corliss, 280 F.2d 808 (2d Cir. 1960)
  …r., 1958, 258 F. 2d 310, 316; Niznik v. United States, 6 Cir., 1950, 184 F. 2d 972; and Mintz v. Howlett, 2 Cir., 1953, 207 F. 2d 758, are distinguishable. See United States v. Chodorski, 7 Cir., 1956, 240 F. 2d 590, 592-593, certiorari denied 1957, 353 U.S. 950, 77 S.Ct. 861, 1 L.Ed.2d 858. Herold’s other procedural point relates to the inclusion in his file of a letter to the Appeal Board, the existence of which allegedly was not disclosed to Herold. The letter, commenting on the recommendation of the De…
• Fanderlik-Locke Co. v. United States, 285 F.2d 939 (10th Cir. 1960)
  …ied to the court without a jury, that findings of fact will not be disturbed on appeal if they are sustained by the evidence and are not clearly erroneous. E. g., Wunderlich Contracting Co. v. United States, 10 Cir., 240 F. 2d 201, certiorari denied 353 U.S. 950, 77 S.Ct. 861, 1 L.Ed.2d 859; St. Paul-Mercury Indem. Co. v. United States, supra. Shortly after the subcontract was executed a change order was made which, for an additional payment of $2,500, provided for three coats of paint on all exposed inter…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• SAM MacRi & Sons, Inc. v. U. S. A. for the Use of Oaks Constr. Co., 313 F.2d 119 (9th Cir. 1963)
  …f them bid intelligently if the bid is also taken to include unspecified additional work, not shown on the drawings? (See Wunderlich Contracting Co. v. United States ex rel. Reischel & Cottrell, 10 Cir., 1957, 240 F. 2d 201, 205, cert. denied, 1957, 353 U.S. 950, 77 S.Ct. 861, 1 L.Ed.2d 859) Both the estimated quantities and the-nature of the terrain to be worked must be considered if an intelligent bid is to-be made. If the provision, which was not drawn by Oaks, was intended to apply to additional “quanti…