Commodity Credit Corporation v. Rosenberg Bros. & Co., Inc., a Corporation, Rosenberg Bros. & Co., Inc., a Corporation v. Commodity Credit Corporation
Opinion
lead Opinion
McALLISTER, J.
Rosenberg Bros. & Co., Inc., hereinafter called “Rosenberg,” sued the Commodity Credit Corporation, hereinafter called “Commodity” or “the government,” for breach of contract, and, on a trial before the district court, sitting without a jury, secured a judgment in its favor in the amount of $160,366.88. Both parties appeal, Rosenberg claiming that it is entitled to more; the Commodity Credit Corporation claiming that it is entitled to nothing.
The background of the case is as follows: On September 10, 1947, pursuant to a government program to support and stabilize the prices of dried fruits, the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, who was also the Chairman of the Commodity Credit Corporation, asked for offers for the sale of 30,000 tons of raisins and various quantities of other dried fruits. Rosenberg, on September 19, offered to sell 10,000 tons of raisins to Commodity at prices ranging between $151 and $152 per ton, according to the kind of containers used. Rosenberg’s offer was accepted by Commodity on September 23. On September 24, a standard government contract was executed between Rosenberg and Commodity, by the terms of which Rosenberg agreed to deliver 10,000…
concurrence Opinion
Denman, J.
(concurring in the result).
*514 The determining question in this case is whether Rosenberg Bros., in fixing the amounts of its bids to sell to the Commodity Credit Corporation raisins which it did not then have, can rely on that Corporation’s statement on September 5, 1947, that it intended to purchase “a maximum of * * * 61,000 tons of [Thompson seedless] raisins” conditioned by the following, “if the purchase of this total quantity * * * is necessary to provide outlets for the relatively large 1947 production.”
If such a statement had been made by a private corporation having a wide market control, it well could be argued that having made bids a dealer like Rosenberg Bros, could hold the corporation liable if, after accepting a bid it then proceeded so to increase its purchases that the costs of the raisins to Rosenberg were thereby increased. In such a situation, Rosenberg might be entitled to recover damages based upon the cost to it of the raisins if the 61,000 ton representation had been complied with.
However, the Commodity Credit Corporation is not such an ordinary buyer. It is a government institution whose duty with respect to the Thompson seedless raisin industry is…
Opinion
243 F.2d 504 COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION, Appellant, v. ROSENBERG BROS. & CO., Inc., a Corporation, Appellee. ROSENBERG BROS. & CO., Inc., a Corporation, Appellant, v. COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION, Appellee. No. 14884. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. March 7, 1957. Rehearing Denied May 13, 1957. Lloyd H. Burke, U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., George Cochran Doub and Warren E. Burger, Asst. Attys. Gen., Carl Eardley and Melvin Richter, Attys., Washington, D.C., for appellant. Lloyd Dinkelspiel, Edward W. Rosston, Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe, San Francisco, Cal., Melville Ehrlich, Washington, D.C., for appellee. Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and McALLISTER and BARNES, Circuit Judges. McALLISTER, Circuit Judge. 1 Rosenberg Bros. & Co., Inc., hereinafter called 'Rosenberg,' sued the Commodity Credit Corporation, hereinafter called 'Commodity' or 'the government,' for breach of contract, and, on a trial before the district court, sitting without a jury, secured a judgment in its favor in the amount of $160,366.88. Both parties appeal, Rosenberg claiming that it is entitled to more; the Commodity Credit Corporation claiming that it is entitled to…