Uploaded February 2025 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
DJ Manufacturing Corp. v. United States - United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
86 F.3d 1130 (1996)
A liquidated damages clause in a contract stipulates the amount of damages the promisee will recover if the promisor breaches the contract.
Such clauses are generally enforceable unless the amount of damages is so high that it punishes the promisor for its failure to perform rather than simply compensating the promisee for its injury.
In DJ Manufacturing Corporation versus United States, a plaintiff who fell down on the job tried to get out from under its promise to pay liquidated damages.
DJ Manufacturing contracted with the federal government to supply combat field packs to support troops participating in operation Desert Storm. The contract provided for liquidated damages to be assessed at one fifteenth of one percent of the contract price for each day that delivery was delayed. DJ missed multiple delivery deadlines.
Accordingly, the government withheld payment of about eight percent of the contract price.
DJ sued the government and the court of federal claims to recover the withheld amount, arguing that the liquidated damages clause was an unenforceable penalty.
The government moved for summary judgment. In support of its motion, the government submitted evidence that possession of the field packs was essential to the troops' combat readiness and that all contracts for materials for operation Desert Storm contained liquidated damages clauses for late delivery because it was critical to get war supplies to the soldiers quickly. In opposition, DJ's president testified that the clause appeared to be just a standard rate and not related to any specific need for the contract items. The district court granted the government's motion. DJ appealed to the federal circuit.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/dj-manufacturing-corp-v-united-states
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/dj-manufacturing-corp-v-united-states
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
DJ Manufacturing Corp. v. United States - United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
86 F.3d 1130 (1996)
A liquidated damages clause in a contract stipulates the amount of damages the promisee will recover if the promisor breaches the contract.
Such clauses are generally enforceable unless the amount of damages is so high that it punishes the promisor for its failure to perform rather than simply compensating the promisee for its injury.
In DJ Manufacturing Corporation versus United States, a plaintiff who fell down on the job tried to get out from under its promise to pay liquidated damages.
DJ Manufacturing contracted with the federal government to supply combat field packs to support troops participating in operation Desert Storm. The contract provided for liquidated damages to be assessed at one fifteenth of one percent of the contract price for each day that delivery was delayed. DJ missed multiple delivery deadlines.
Accordingly, the government withheld payment of about eight percent of the contract price.
DJ sued the government and the court of federal claims to recover the withheld amount, arguing that the liquidated damages clause was an unenforceable penalty.
The government moved for summary judgment. In support of its motion, the government submitted evidence that possession of the field packs was essential to the troops' combat readiness and that all contracts for materials for operation Desert Storm contained liquidated damages clauses for late delivery because it was critical to get war supplies to the soldiers quickly. In opposition, DJ's president testified that the clause appeared to be just a standard rate and not related to any specific need for the contract items. The district court granted the government's motion. DJ appealed to the federal circuit.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/dj-manufacturing-corp-v-united-states
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/dj-manufacturing-corp-v-united-states
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries




![Roy v Euro Holland Vastgoed, B V Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Roy v Euro Holland Vastgoed | 404 So.2d 410 (1981)
Suppose the owner of a parcel of land decides to sever the parcel into two plots, one of which has no access to a public road. If the owner then sells the landlocked plot to another person, an implied easement of necessity arises, allowing the purchaser to cross the plot retained by the owner to get to the road.
Now suppose years pass, and both plots are sold many times over to new purchasers.
Do subsequent purchasers still have that easement?
The court discusses that question in Roy versus Euro Holland Vastoed.
Henry Buckman owned a large parcel of land. In nineteen thirteen, Buckman subdivided the property into multiple tracks.
Buckman sold one of these tracts to Frank and John Coventry.
The only access to the Coventrys tract was across the portion of land retained by Buckman, which abutted a public road. The Coventrys tract was sold many times thereafter, eventually being owned by Maurice and Lillian Roy, whom well call Roy. The land that Buckman retained was eventually sold to Euro Holland Vast Hode. Because Roy couldnt get to his property, except across Euro Hollands property, Roy filed suit in state court seeking an implied easement of necessity over Euro Hollands land.
After a nonjury trial, the trial court entered judgment against Roy. The court concluded that Roy hadnt established the necessary unity of title in a common source because Roys grantor had never owned Euro Hollands land. Roy appealed to the Florida District Court of Appeal.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [insert link of case brief on Quimbee]
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [insert the link of the case brief on Quimbee]
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/quimbeedotcom/
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries Roy v Euro Holland Vastgoed, B V Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XWSuBb6GnZg/mqdefault.jpg)





