Looney v. District of Columbia

Looney v. District of Columbia

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Looney v. District of Columbia
ArgueDate=January 9
ArgueYear=
DecideDate=January 26
DecideYear=1885
FullName=Looney v. District of Columbia
USVol=113
USPage=258
Citation=
Prior=
Subsequent=
Holding=
SCOTUS=1882-1887
Majority=
JoinMajority=
LawsApplied=

"Looney v. District of Columbia", ussc|113|258|1885, a contract in writing made September 11, 1872, between the petitioner and the Board of Public Works of the District of Columbia by which he agreed to furnish materials and labor, and in a good and substantial manner to grade and gravel Fourteenth Street East between B Street South and Boundary, in the City of Washington, at prices specified, and, among other things, agreed to punctually pay in cash the workmen employed by him, and the Board of Public Works agreed to pay him, in lawful money of the United States, the amount which might be found to be due to him from time to time according to the contract. He performed his part of the contract according to its terms. Upon measurements made and accounts stated during the progress and at the completion of the work, there appeared to be due to him ,364.75 (which, by a mistake of addition unknown to either party, was 0 too much), for which he received certificates of the Auditor of the Board of Public Works, issued in accordance with the usual course of business as conducted by that Board with its creditors, in different sums. [ [http://supreme.justia.com/us/113/258/case.html Looney v. District of Columbia, 113 U.S. 258 (1885)] "Justia.com" ] A creditor who receives from his debtor a certificate in writing, not negotiable, of the amount of his debt, and sells the certificate to a third person for value less than its nominal amount, thereby authorizes the purchaser to receive the amount from the debtor, and cannot, after the debtor has paid it to the purchaser, maintain any action against the debtor.

The nature and history of the auditor's certificates and of the so-called sewer certificates and other securities issued by the District of Columbia as well as the legislation of Congress related to them, were fully stated in opinions delivered by the Court of Claims in other cases, so for this case it was sufficient to observe that the sewer certificates and other interest-bearing securities of the district were negotiable instruments, and that the auditor's certificates were not negotiable, but were merely evidence of the debt of the district to the claimant under its contract with him.

If he had kept the auditor's certificates, he could have used them as evidence to recover the full amount of the debt from the district.

But the facts found show that he has so dealt with these certificates as to prevent him from maintaining this suit. The amount of some of the certificates he has been paid by the District in money. Others of the certificates he has sold and assigned for value, and thereby transferred the equitable title in them to the assignee, and authorized him to receive payment of their amount from the District, and the payment of that amount in full by the District to the assignee is a discharge of so much of its debt to the claimant. Cowdrey v. Vandenburgh, 101 U. S. 572; Foss v. Lowell Savings Bank, 111 Mass. 28. The remaining certificates he has exchanged with the District for an equal amount of its negotiable securities, payable on time, with interest, and he has since sold those securities for their value in the market. The District is liable to the purchaser either upon those securities themselves or upon the other bonds since taken by him instead of some of them, and cannot be also held liable to the original creditor for the same amount or any part thereof. Harris v. Johnston, 3 Cranch 311; Emblin v. Dartnell, 1 D. & L. 591.

The conversation was found to have taken place between the treasurer of the District and the claimant before he sold the negotiable securities has no tendency to prove any authority or any intention of the treasurer to make a new or different contract in behalf of the District.

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 113

References

External links

* [http://supreme.justia.com/us/113/258/case.html 113 258] "Justia.com" (full case)


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Нужно сделать НИР?

Look at other dictionaries:

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”