William A. Ransom and Robert D. Nesen v. The United States

How courts have described this case

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

• finding surety could not assert the equitable doctrine of subrogation when the government notified the surety it was concerned as to the contractor’s default
• explaining that, for a claim under the Tucker Act that is based on a contract, “the contract must be between the plaintiff and the government and entitle the plaintiff to money damages in the event of the government’s breach of that contract”
• “Although the legal consequences of express and implied-in- fact contracts are the same, an implied-in-fact contract is inferred from the parties’ conduct.”
• “To maintain a cause of action pursuant to the Tucker Act that is based on a contract, the contract must be between the plaintiff and the [Government”
• “To maintain a cause of action pursuant to the Tucker Act that is based on a contract . . . between the plaintiff and the [G]overnment[.]”
• “To maintain a cause of action pursuant to the Tucker Act that is based on a contract, the contract must be between the plaintiff and the [G]overnment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).