United States v. Ellicott, 223 U.S. 524 (1912)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 223 U.S. 519, click here.

United States v. Ellicott

No. 85

Argued December 7, 8, 1911
Decided February 26, 1912
223 U.S. 524

APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS

Syllabus

The general rule governing appeals is applicable to appeal from the Court of Claims.

A judgment is not generally treated as final until a motion for new trial or rehearing, which has been entertained by the court, has been disposed of; in such a case, the time for appeal runs from the date of such disposition. Kingman v. Western Manufacturing Co., 170 U.S. 675.

When there is an irreconcilable conflict between essential provisions of a contract for building and the specifications, and the latter cannot be ignored, the contract is void for uncertainty, and unenforceable.

Where a bid has been accepted for government work after the advertisement necessary to give it validity, and the final contract contains specifications materially lessening the work and at variance with the terms of the contract as advertised, the contractor cannot recover damages because the government abrogates the contract; if the specifications are not binding on the government, the contractor has no basis for recovery, and if they are binding, the contract varies from the one advertised for, and has no validity, and so held as to a bid for barge for the Panama Canal Commission.

44 Ct.Cl. 127 and 45 Ct.Cl. 469, reversed.

The facts, which involve the construction of a contract for dredges for the Panama Canal and the liability of the United States for damages for abrogation of the same, are stated in the opinion.