Stewart Veneer Co. v. Ramey

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “the individuals identified by plaintiff, who it alleges acted on the behalf of the [United States] to arrive at the alleged accord and satisfaction, were not competent to compromise the government’s claims against the plaintiff’ because they had no authority to do so
• “The legal doctrine of accord and satisfaction assumes that a bona fide dispute exists prior to discharge of the debt.”
• (“At the same time, the government, when enforcing a damages clause, has a duty to mitigate such damages when a contractor breaches the contract between the parties.”) (citing Churchill Chem. Corp. v. United States, 221 Ct.Cl. 284, 288, 602 F.2d 358, 361 (1979

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).