Sutcliffe Storage & Warehouse Co. v. United States case brief
summary
162 F.2d 849 (1947)
CASE FACTS
A corporation brought four separate actions against the government. The corporation executed a lease of certain premises it controlled to the United States Navy (government). Each action covered a different time period. The corporation contended that the government occupied and used a greater area than was designated in the lease for the period in question and that therefore it was entitled to the reasonable value of the use and occupancy of the additional area for each period.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court dismissing the corporation's claims in three of the four cases. The court dismissed the corporation's appeal as to the fourth case because the government made no motion in that case.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
162 F.2d 849 (1947)
CASE SYNOPSIS
In four separate appeals, plaintiff
corporation appealed from the judgment of a United States district
court, which ruled in favor of defendant federal government in the
corporation's actions to recover sums due for the use and occupancy
of certain realty in Boston and which granted the government's
motions to dismiss.CASE FACTS
A corporation brought four separate actions against the government. The corporation executed a lease of certain premises it controlled to the United States Navy (government). Each action covered a different time period. The corporation contended that the government occupied and used a greater area than was designated in the lease for the period in question and that therefore it was entitled to the reasonable value of the use and occupancy of the additional area for each period.
DISCUSSION
- On appeal, the court affirmed the judgments of the trial court in favor of the government in three of the cases.
- The court dismissed the corporation's appeal in the fourth case because the government made no motion in that case.
- The court held that the doctrine against splitting claims also applied to claims against the government.
- The court held that the fact that the corporation had separate leases for the adjoining property covering each fiscal year was not a sufficient basis to allow it to divide its claim for use and occupation of the particular premises here involved into four parts.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court dismissing the corporation's claims in three of the four cases. The court dismissed the corporation's appeal as to the fourth case because the government made no motion in that case.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment