Court Opinion

ID: 6856134
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-23 20:42:26.396492+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:05:09.804377
License: Public Domain

WOOLLEY, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
It should he noted that in the Lambert Lumber Company Case the department charged with the work did not make an administrative determination of the claim but passed it on to the General Accounting Office which, doubtless, in that situation, had authority finally to act upon the matter. Distinguishing the dicta from the decision in the Lambert Case and adhering to the law of the Peeler Case, I believe the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 did not repeal or change the provisions of the Hurd Act requiring an appropriate administrative determination of a claim before suit. I would find in this ease that the Department of the Interior, having been charged with the work, made such a determination or settlement, and the action of the General Accounting Office was not a settlement of the contractor’s claim but was merely an accounting transaction whereby the Office, before directing payment, went over, examined, checked and audited the settlement previously made by the Department; that in this case the settlement so made by the Department was the one contemplated by the Hurd Act and that, in consequence, the plaintiff-contractor brought his suit too late.