Cosgrove v. United States

15736
Decided Court of Claims
Disposition
other
full scope
Scan to open on mobileScan to open on another device
Court
Court of Claims
Decided
Judge
Peelle, J.
Posture
Suit brought by administratrix to recover one month's extra pay for mail transportation service; United States filed a counterclaim for overpayments.
Claimants (2)
Amanda M. Cosgrove, Administratrix of the estate of Cornelius Cosgrove
Mr. A. J. Willard
v.
Defendant (1)
The United States
Mr. Charles C. Binney, Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Dodge

Overview

Judgment entered against the claimant in the sum of $32,098.64, to be paid out of the estate of the deceased.

Case summary

The claimant, administratrix of Cornelius Cosgrove, sued the United States for one month's extra pay for mail transportation services. The United States did not contest the claim but filed a counterclaim for $33,921.69, alleging that the contractor had been overpaid due to an erroneous order by the Postmaster-General that falsely claimed an increase in route distance by including the post-office of Roswell. The court found that the contractor had already identified Roswell as part of the route in his own handwriting and that no additional service was performed. Consequently, the court allowed the government's counterclaim, offset the claimant's recovery, and entered judgment for the United States.

Abstract

The administratrix of a deceased contractor sued the government for extra pay for mail transportation services, which the government did not contest but countered with a claim for overpayment due to an erroneous order including an additional post office in the route distance. The court found the contractor had already included that post office in the route with no additional service performed, allowing the government's counterclaim. Judgment was entered against the claimant for the net overpayment amount, payable from the estate.

Procedural posture

Posture at trial
Suit brought by administratrix to recover one month's extra pay for mail transportation service; United States filed a counterclaim for overpayments.
Posture on appeal
Original action in the Court of Claims.

Legal categories

Business

Case record

Full case name
Amanda M. Cosgrove, Admx., v. The United States
Docket number
15736
Court
Court of Claims
Decided
Opinion author
Peelle, J.
Opinion type
published
Precedential status
binding
Judges on panel
Peelle

Issues & holdings

2
Issues raised
2
affirmed
1
Holdings
Standard of review

de novo

Disposition rationale

The court conceded the amount was due but offset it against the government's counterclaim.

Preservation

Issue preserved for review

Standard of review

de novo

Disposition rationale

The contractor was bound to know the route distance and that no additional service was performed; therefore, payments were illegal.

Preservation

Issue preserved for review

Holdings of the court

Recovery of overpayments by the United States
The United States may recover money paid to a contractor under an order for an assumed increase in distance when no such increase existed.
The contractor was bound by his own construction of the contract and the physical reality of the route; the Postmaster-General's order was in violation of law as no additional service was performed.
non-binding

Timeline

No timeline recorded.

Facts & evidence

Incident

Date
1878-07-01 to 1882-06-30
Location
New Mexico, Post Route No. 39109

Key facts

6 facts
  1. Cornelius Cosgrove contracted to transport mail on route No. 39109.
  2. The advertisement stated the route distance as 442.5 miles.
  3. The contractor, in his own handwriting, identified the route as 429 miles and included Roswell as a post-office on the route.
  4. The Postmaster-General later issued an order claiming the inclusion of Roswell increased the route distance by 62 miles, granting additional pay.
  5. The court found the route via Roswell was the only practical route and was known to the contractor at the time of bidding.
  6. The government sought to recover overpayments made based on the erroneous assumption of increased distance.

Authorities

Cited authorities (2)

McElrath v. United States, 102 U. S., 426
appliedprecedent
Authority to reexamine accounts in a suit against the government.
The United States v. Burchard, 125 U. S., 176
appliedprecedent
Authority to reexamine accounts in a suit against the government.
Index terms34
Summary terms
Legal mechanisms
Legal concepts
Legal issues
Legal actions
Action type
other
Context
The court allowed the government's counterclaim to be set off against the claimant's recovery, resulting in a net judgment for the United States.
Scope
full
Geo locations
Search facets
Parties
Judges
Peelle
Courts
Locations