31:
229:
officer in command. The officer suggested the amount of facilities are required, but did not approve of the plans. The barracks was completed in
December and the troops moved in. Two more piers were later leased to the government by the company. The barracks were occupied by the troops until May, 1919 and the piers were returned to the company in June, 1919. Compensation was not mentioned until the completion of the barracks and the draftsman told a military officer that the government should reimburse him for some of his trouble.
265:
dismissing the appellant's action for compensation for costs of constructing temporary barracks to house the
National Guard at piers leased by it to appellee was affirmed. The governmental officials involved in the construction at the piers had no authority to order the work so there was no express
228:
On one occasion an agent of the company suggested fitting up an unused transfer shed on the pier leased to the
Government. Col. Kimball agreed but did not ask about work be done or compensation. The agent drafted plans for retrofitting the transfer shed into a barracks and showed the draft to the
224:
companies were sent to Locust Point with the duty to protect the government property and the piers leased by it. The company supplied a wrecking train as quarters for the
National guard. The company maintained civilian guards and a fire department for all of its property, whether leased or not.
220:. In October, 1917, Col. Kimball requested to lease a pier from the government for supplies arriving for shipment to Europe. Two of the other piers owned by the railway company were destroyed by a fire. This caused the company and Col. Kimball to request for the guards. Two
93:
An implied in fact contract exists as, an agreement founded upon a meeting of minds, which, although not embodied in an express contract, is inferred, as a fact, from conduct of the parties showing, in the light of the surrounding circumstances, their tacit
248:
made no finding as to the amount expended by the company constructing the barracks. None of the officials connected with the work had any authority to order the construction of a barracks. Baltimore & Ohio
Railroad Co. appealed a judgment of the
485:
568:
478:
994:
208:, which, although not embodied in an express contract, is inferred, as a fact, from conduct of the parties showing, in the light of the surrounding circumstances, their tacit understanding.”
322:
369:
279:
72:
724:
383:
492:
880:
672:
225:
Later, the wrecking train was moved away by the company and the troops moved into tents. The winter was cold and the soldiers suffered hardships from the weather.
315:
575:
974:
828:
979:
853:
308:
984:
783:
457:
450:
362:
665:
499:
989:
35:
464:
561:
524:
376:
1004:
599:
679:
540:
506:
627:
262:
250:
245:
717:
186:
928:
658:
421:
331:
1009:
999:
471:
125:
873:
394:
355:
267:
237:
201:
710:
613:
586:
513:
153:
812:
137:
790:
621:
64:
432:
346:
161:
919:
746:
609:
241:
217:
129:
109:
846:
821:
731:
547:
270:, because construction was voluntarily undertaken by appellant, with no mention of compensation.
948:
939:
864:
742:
149:
887:
756:
701:
651:
638:
233:
205:
193:
894:
554:
533:
909:
774:
763:
594:
221:
141:
117:
968:
642:
412:
197:
67:
292:
440:
300:
266:
agreement. Further, the court reasoned there was no substantial basis for an
436:
486:
Arizona
Cartridge Remanufacturers Ass'n Inc. v. Lexmark International Inc.
236:, c. 94, 40 Stat. 1272 for constructing temporary barracks based on an
79:
569:
Atlantic Marine
Construction Co. v. United States District Court
479:
In re Zappos.com, Inc., Customer Data
Security Breach Litigation
232:
The railway company filed a petition to recover money under the
304:
30:
240:, in December, 1917, through Col. Kimball with Locust Point,
370:
Kansas City
Wholesale Grocery Co. v. Weber Packing Corp.
54:
Baltimore & Ohio
Railroad Company v. United States
280:
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 261
995:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Taft Court
938:
918:
908:
863:
838:
811:
804:
773:
741:
700:
693:
637:
608:
585:
523:
431:
411:
393:
345:
338:
216:The railway company owned 8 piers in Locust Point,
174:
169:
98:
87:
59:
49:
42:
23:
725:Douglas v. U.S. District Court ex rel Talk America
403:Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States
384:Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc
881:Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. v. United States
493:Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology
673:G. L. Christian and Associates v. United States
316:
8:
24:Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. United States
576:Salsbury v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.
915:
829:Lenawee County Board of Health v. Messerly
808:
697:
342:
323:
309:
301:
204:exists as, “an agreement … founded upon a
20:
854:SCO Group, Inc. v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
363:Gottlieb v. Tropicana Hotel & Casino
784:Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.
458:Ticketmaster Corp. v. Tickets.com, Inc.
666:Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.
500:Bowers v. Baystate Technologies, Inc.
18:1923 United States Supreme Court case
7:
465:Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble, Inc.
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
975:United States Supreme Court cases
200:. The Supreme Court held that an
187:Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.
78:58 Ct.Cl. 709; 43 S. Ct. 425; 67
600:Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent
562:King v. Trustees of Boston Univ.
377:Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. v. Green
29:
980:United States contract case law
985:1923 in United States case law
680:Kellogg Bridge Co. v. Hamilton
541:Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon
507:Bragg v. Linden Research, Inc.
1:
628:MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
263:United States Court of Claims
251:United States Court of Claims
246:United States Court of Claims
192:, 261 U.S. 592 (1923), is a
990:Baltimore and Ohio Railroad
718:Harris v. Blockbuster, Inc.
291:Full text of judgment from
1026:
929:Drennan v. Star Paving Co.
749:(unwritten & informal)
659:Seixas and Seixas v. Woods
422:Ellefson v. Megadeth, Inc.
332:United States contract law
694:Defense against formation
472:ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg
103:
92:
28:
874:United States v. Spearin
395:Implied-in-fact contract
356:Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc.
268:implied in fact contract
238:Implied-in-fact contract
202:implied in fact contract
711:Morrison v. Amway Corp.
587:Substantial performance
514:Feldman v. Google, Inc.
1005:1923 in rail transport
791:Buchwald v. Paramount
622:De Cicco v. Schweizer
45:Decided April 9, 1923
43:Argued March 12, 1923
347:Offer and acceptance
261:The judgment of the
126:Oliver W. Holmes Jr.
920:Promissory estoppel
805:Cancelling Contract
242:Baltimore, Maryland
218:Baltimore, Maryland
138:James C. McReynolds
130:Willis Van Devanter
847:Stoddard v. Martin
822:Sherwood v. Walker
732:McMichael v. Price
548:Kirksey v. Kirksey
451:Specht v. Netscape
339:Contract formation
114:Associate Justices
962:
961:
958:
957:
949:Britton v. Turner
940:Unjust enrichment
904:
903:
865:Misrepresentation
800:
799:
743:Statute of frauds
689:
688:
182:
181:
162:Edward T. Sanford
150:George Sutherland
1017:
1010:Railway case law
1000:1923 in case law
916:
888:Laidlaw v. Organ
809:
757:Buffaloe v. Hart
745:(written) &
702:Illusory promise
698:
652:Hawkins v. McGee
639:Implied warranty
343:
325:
318:
311:
302:
234:Dent Act of 1919
206:meeting of minds
194:US Supreme Court
189:v. United States
99:Court membership
33:
32:
21:
1025:
1024:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1016:
1015:
1014:
965:
964:
963:
954:
934:
900:
895:Smith v. Bolles
859:
834:
796:
769:
737:
685:
633:
604:
581:
555:Angel v. Murray
534:Hamer v. Sidway
519:
427:
407:
389:
334:
329:
298:
288:
276:
259:
214:
152:
140:
128:
110:William H. Taft
83:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1023:
1021:
1013:
1012:
1007:
1002:
997:
992:
987:
982:
977:
967:
966:
960:
959:
956:
955:
953:
952:
944:
942:
936:
935:
933:
932:
924:
922:
913:
910:Quasi-contract
906:
905:
902:
901:
899:
898:
891:
884:
877:
869:
867:
861:
860:
858:
857:
850:
842:
840:
836:
835:
833:
832:
825:
817:
815:
806:
802:
801:
798:
797:
795:
794:
787:
779:
777:
775:Unconscionable
771:
770:
768:
767:
764:Foman v. Davis
760:
752:
750:
747:Parol evidence
739:
738:
736:
735:
728:
721:
714:
706:
704:
695:
691:
690:
687:
686:
684:
683:
676:
669:
662:
655:
647:
645:
635:
634:
632:
631:
624:
618:
616:
606:
605:
603:
602:
597:
595:Lucy v. Zehmer
591:
589:
583:
582:
580:
579:
572:
565:
558:
551:
544:
537:
529:
527:
521:
520:
518:
517:
510:
503:
496:
489:
482:
475:
468:
461:
454:
446:
444:
429:
428:
426:
425:
417:
415:
409:
408:
406:
405:
399:
397:
391:
390:
388:
387:
380:
373:
366:
359:
351:
349:
340:
336:
335:
330:
328:
327:
320:
313:
305:
296:
295:
287:
286:External links
284:
283:
282:
275:
272:
258:
255:
222:National guard
213:
210:
180:
179:
176:
172:
171:
167:
166:
165:
164:
142:Louis Brandeis
118:Joseph McKenna
115:
112:
107:
101:
100:
96:
95:
94:understanding.
90:
89:
85:
84:
77:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1022:
1011:
1008:
1006:
1003:
1001:
998:
996:
993:
991:
988:
986:
983:
981:
978:
976:
973:
972:
970:
951:
950:
946:
945:
943:
941:
937:
931:
930:
926:
925:
923:
921:
917:
914:
911:
907:
897:
896:
892:
890:
889:
885:
883:
882:
878:
876:
875:
871:
870:
868:
866:
862:
856:
855:
851:
849:
848:
844:
843:
841:
837:
831:
830:
826:
824:
823:
819:
818:
816:
814:
810:
807:
803:
793:
792:
788:
786:
785:
781:
780:
778:
776:
772:
766:
765:
761:
759:
758:
754:
753:
751:
748:
744:
740:
734:
733:
729:
727:
726:
722:
720:
719:
715:
713:
712:
708:
707:
705:
703:
699:
696:
692:
682:
681:
677:
675:
674:
670:
668:
667:
663:
661:
660:
656:
654:
653:
649:
648:
646:
644:
643:caveat emptor
640:
636:
630:
629:
625:
623:
620:
619:
617:
615:
611:
607:
601:
598:
596:
593:
592:
590:
588:
584:
578:
577:
573:
571:
570:
566:
564:
563:
559:
557:
556:
552:
550:
549:
545:
543:
542:
538:
536:
535:
531:
530:
528:
526:
525:Consideration
522:
516:
515:
511:
509:
508:
504:
502:
501:
497:
495:
494:
490:
488:
487:
483:
481:
480:
476:
474:
473:
469:
467:
466:
462:
460:
459:
455:
453:
452:
448:
447:
445:
442:
438:
434:
430:
424:
423:
419:
418:
416:
414:
410:
404:
401:
400:
398:
396:
392:
386:
385:
381:
379:
378:
374:
372:
371:
367:
365:
364:
360:
358:
357:
353:
352:
350:
348:
344:
341:
337:
333:
326:
321:
319:
314:
312:
307:
306:
303:
299:
294:
290:
289:
285:
281:
278:
277:
273:
271:
269:
264:
256:
254:
252:
247:
243:
239:
235:
230:
226:
223:
219:
211:
209:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
190:
188:
177:
173:
168:
163:
159:
155:
154:Pierce Butler
151:
147:
143:
139:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
116:
113:
111:
108:
106:Chief Justice
105:
104:
102:
97:
91:
86:
81:
75:
74:
69:
66:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
947:
927:
893:
886:
879:
872:
852:
845:
827:
820:
789:
782:
762:
755:
730:
723:
716:
709:
678:
671:
664:
657:
650:
626:
574:
567:
560:
553:
546:
539:
532:
512:
505:
498:
491:
484:
477:
470:
463:
456:
449:
420:
413:Mailbox rule
402:
382:
375:
368:
361:
354:
297:
260:
231:
227:
215:
198:contract law
185:
184:
183:
170:Case opinion
157:
145:
133:
121:
71:
53:
15:
614:3rd parties
969:Categories
912:obligation
839:Illegality
443:agreements
441:Browsewrap
433:Shrinkwrap
437:Clickwrap
60:Citations
274:See also
257:Judgment
196:case on
175:Majority
813:Mistake
610:Privity
178:Sanford
88:Holding
612:&
293:Justia
244:. The
160:
158:·
156:
148:
146:·
144:
136:
134:·
132:
124:
122:·
120:
80:L. Ed.
212:Facts
73:more
65:U.S.
63:261
82:816
68:592
971::
641:,
439:,
435:,
253:.
324:e
317:t
310:v
76:)
70:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.