118 C. Cls.

EMINENT DOMAIN-Continued

fixing maximum export prices for each commodity
and providing that in case of a person other than the
manufacturer or producer of the commodity "the
maximum export price shall be the price at which
such commodity was acquired for export" with
certain authorized additions; the court concludes
that at the time of the requisitions made in August,
September, and October 1942, the plaintiff could
have lawfully sold its steel for the cost to it, and
that there were buyers available, willing to buy at
that price. Id.

War and National Defense 504.

XXXII. Plaintiff is not entitled to recover as a part of just
compensation certain export premiums which the
OPA practice and export regulations permitted ex-
porters to add to their cost when they sold for ex-
port. Plaintiff's steel having been requisitioned by
the Government, plaintiff incurred no export ex-
penses such as contemplated by these regulations,
and is therefore not entitled to reimbursement for
them.

Id.

War and National Defense 14.

XXXIII. In case No. 48977, where the requisitions of plaintiff's
steel by the Board of Economic Warfare took place
in August, September, and October 1942, and the
Board made determinations and awards of compen-
sation within a few months thereafter; and where
the plaintiff under the applicable statute could have
then accepted 50 percent of the awards, reserving
its right to sue for the balance deemed to be just
compensation; and the plaintiff did not request pay-
ment of the 50 percent until May 21, 1948; it is
held that plaintiff is not entitled to recover interest
upon the 50 percent of the awards which it could
have so received except for the period from May
21, 1948, to June 20, 1949, the date on which the 50
percent was paid to it. On the amounts which the
court has determined to be just compensation,
plaintiff is entitled to interest at 4 percent per an-
num from the dates of taking to the dates of awards,
and on the same amount, less 50 percent of the
amounts of the awards, from the dates of the awards
to the date of the judgment.

Id.

118 C. Cls.

EMINENT DOMAIN-Continued

XXXIV. In case No. 48978, where the requisition of plaintiff's
steel by the Navy took place in February 1942;
and where the Navy made the statutory awards of
compensation on May 31, 1948, which awards the
plaintiff rejected and elected to receive 50 percent
and sue for the balance deemed to be just compen-
sation; and where the Government paid the 50 per-
cent on September 14, 1948; it is held that the
plaintiff is entitled to 4 percent interest per annum,
as a part of just compensation, on the several prin-
cipal amounts which the court has determined to be
the value of the several lots of steel, from the re-
spective dates of taking until September 14, 1948,
and interest at the same rate upon these several
amounts less, in each case, the 50 percent which was
paid to plaintiff on September 14, 1948, from Sep-
tember 15, 1948, to the date of judgment. Id.

XXXV. Where plaintiff sues for the value of the use of two
vessels, the Airdale and the Nellie Juan, cannery
tenders, requisitioned by the Government on a bare-
boat charter basis, for a portion of the war period,
1942-43; and where no compensation for such use
has been paid; it is held that plaintiff is entitled to
Copper River Packing Co., 561.

recover.

XXXVI. Upon all of the evidence, and eliminating the enhance-
ment in values due to the causes necessitating the
taking, it is held that the fair and reasonable charter
hire for the Airdale was $25 per day during the
period September 6, 1942, to April 22, 1943, 227
days and 14 hours, amounting to $5,689.58. Id.

XXXVII. Upon all the evidence, and eliminating the enhance-
ment in value due to the causes necessitating the
taking, it is held that the fair and reasonable charter
hire for the Nellie Juan was $35 per day during the
period, September 7, 1942, to April 22, 1943, 2261⁄2
days, amounting to $7,927.50.

War and National Defense

Id.
14.

XXXVIII. Interest at the rate of 4 percent per annum, as a part
of just compensation, is allowed on the monthly

118 C. Cls.

EMINENT DOMAIN-Continued

payments due from the dates when such payments
became due, respectively, until July 5, 1943, when
the tender under Section 902 of the Merchant
Marine Act of 1936, as amended, was in effect made
and declined. The interest thus calculated for the
term indicated amounts to $258.71 for the two
vessels. Id.

United States 110.

War and National Defense 14.

XXXIX. Where the plaintiff failed to execute the bareboat
charters offered by the Government, because the
charter terms were not satisfactory; and where the
plaintiff failed to avail itself of its statutory right to
accept 75 percent of the amount offered by the
defendant on July 5, 1943, and retain its right to
sue for the balance claimed to be due as just com-
pensation; it is held that plaintiff is entitled to interest
from that date to date of payment of judgment on
the excess which the court has allowed over 75
percent of the amount tendered, which excess is
$8,016.52. Id.

War and National Defense 14.

XL. It is held that plaintiff is entitled also to recover
$8,762.73 for repairs to the Airdale found to be
necessary at the time of redelivery, April 22, 1943,
with interest at the rate of 4 percent per annum
from that date until May 30, 1944, the date of
approval by defendant of the cost of these repairs.
Plaintiff is also entitled to $10,688.01 for the cost
of repairs to the Nellie Juan, plus interest at the
same rate on this amount from April 22, 1943, to
November 6, 1945, the approval date of this item.
The interest as above on the two items amounts to
$1,472.60, which is allowed as part of just compen-
sation. Interest on the repair items to date of
judgment is not allowed. Id.

United States 110.

War and National Defense 14.

XLI. Judgment for plaintiff in the amount of $33,067.82,
plus interest of $1,731.31, together with interest on
$8,016.52 from July 5, 1943, to date of payment. Id.

118 C. Cls.

EMINENT DOMAIN-Continued

XLII. Where plaintiff, a Swiss partnership, alleges in its
petition that plaintiff, in order to induce the United
States Government to adopt an antiaircraft gun
which plaintiff had invented and on which plaintiff
had secured Swiss patents, but not United States
patents, plaintiff had delivered to the Bureau of Naval
Ordnance one of these guns, together with a supply
of ammunition for the purpose of demonstration, and
where plaintiff further alleges that after the Bureau
of Naval Ordnance had tested the gun the United
States Government later adopted the gun as stand-
ard equipment and manufactured many of such guns
and large quantities of ammunition for them; it is
held that the allegations of the petition are not
sufficient to set forth a cause of action under Sec-
tion 1491 of Title 28 U. S. Code, subsections 1 and
4. Defendant's motion sustained and plaintiff's
petition dismissed. Oerlikon, 614.

XLIII. According to the allegations of plaintiff's petition the
negotiations and transactions with respect to the
use of plaintiff's invention, while carried on with the
knowledge and consent of the United States Govern-
ment, were between plaintiff and the British Pur-
chasing Commission, and the United States Govern-
ment was not a party to any contract, express or
implied, with plaintiff. Id.

XLIV. It is not shown by the allegations of plaintiff's petition
that there was a taking of any of the property of
plaintiff which would give rise to any liability for
just compensation under the fifth amendment.
The United States merely ordered from American
manufacturers guns which plaintiff had taught
these manufacturers to make in accordance with
plaintiff's agreement with the British Purchasing
Commission, to which agreement the United States
Government was not a party. Id.

XLV. Where it is not alleged in plaintiff's petition that he
relied upon any promise, express or implied, by any
agency of the United States or any war contractor,
to pay plaintiff on account of the manufacture of

118 C. Cls.

EMINENT DOMAIN-Continued

the guns, there is no cause of action set forth within
the provisions of the Contract Settlement Act, 41
U. S. C. 117; 1946 Ed. Id.

United States

ERRONEOUS SURVEY.

74.

See Indian Claims, I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII.

ESCAPE CLAUSE.

See Contracts XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV.
EVIDENCE

See Eminent Domain XXII; Overtime Pay XI.
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES PAY ACT.

See Overtime Pay X.

FIFTH AMENDMENT.

See Eminent Domain XLII, XLIII, XLIV, XLV.
FIRST WAR POWERS ACT.

See Lucas Act I, II, III.

FOGARTY CASE.

See Lucas Act I, II, III.

GAMBLING LOSSES.

See Taxes XIX, XX, XXI.

GOLD MINING SUSPENDED.

See Just Compensation I, II, III, IV.
GOVERNMENT FUNDS, LOSS OF.

GRATUITY.

Where it is shown by the evidence that plaintiff, an
Army finance officer on duty in the Canal Zone, was
negligent in connection with the loss of payroll funds
entrusted to his custody by another finance officer;
it is held that plaintiff is not entitled to recover under
Sections 250 (3) and 253 of Title 28, U. S. Code.
Binsfeld, 164.

Army and Navy 26.

See Report to Senate I, II.

IMMIGRATION BORDER CONTROL.

See Overtime Pay I, II, III, IV.

IMPLIED CONTRACT.

See Contracts XXV; Eminent Domain XLII, XLIII, XLIV, XLV.
INDIAN CLAIMS.

I. In an opinion rendered in the instant case February
5, 1945 (102 C. Cls. 822), it was held that the defend-
ant had taken lands belonging to the Quinaielt
Tribe of Indians and others described in the opinion.
It was further held that tribes other than the
Quinaielt Tribe had an interest in the lands taken