From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anglo-American and Overseas v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Mar 4, 1957
242 F.2d 236 (2d Cir. 1957)

Summary

denying claim for damages from destruction of tomato paste imported in reliance on import "release notices" issued by the Food and Drug Administration

Summary of this case from Dorking Genetics v. U.S.

Opinion

No. 155, Docket 24194.

Argued February 6, 1957.

Decided March 4, 1957.

Leonard Feldman, New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.

Paul W. Williams, U.S. Atty. for Southern District of New York, New York City (Miriam R. Goldman and Amos J. Peaslee, Jr., Asst. U.S. Attys., New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, MEDINA, Circuit Judge, and J. JOSEPH SMITH, District Judge.


Anglo-American and Overseas Corp., appellant, contracted to sell tomato paste to the United States, which required as a condition precedent to its acceptance of the paste that it satisfy the standards of the Food and Drug Administration. The paste was imported; and the Food and Drug Administration, after sampling it, issued "release notices" that notified Customs officers that the tomato paste could enter the country. Anglo-American then accepted delivery. When it in turn delivered the paste to the government, federal officials once again inspected the paste, found that it did not satisfy the standards of the Food and Drug Administration, and ordered it destroyed. Anglo-American sues now on the ground that the negligence of officials of the Food and Drug Administration in sampling the tomato paste and in issuing "release notices" induced it to accept the paste and thus suffer damages.

This claim, it is clear, "arose out of" the assertedly negligent representation of the quality of the tomato paste by federal employees. Such a claim is barred by Jones v. United States, 2 Cir., 207 F.2d 563, certiorari denied 347 U.S. 921, 74 S.Ct. 518, 98 L.Ed. 1075, which held that Section 2680(h) of the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. excepted from liability negligent as well as intentional misrepresentation.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Anglo-American and Overseas v. United States

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Mar 4, 1957
242 F.2d 236 (2d Cir. 1957)

denying claim for damages from destruction of tomato paste imported in reliance on import "release notices" issued by the Food and Drug Administration

Summary of this case from Dorking Genetics v. U.S.

In Anglo-American Overseas Corp. v. United States, 242 F.2d 236, the Second Circuit analyzed a similar claim and exposed its true basis: "[Plaintiff] contracted to sell tomato paste to the United States, which required as a condition precedent to its acceptance of the paste that it satisfy the standards of the Food and Drug Administration. The paste was imported; and the Food and Drug Administration, after sampling it, issued `release notices' that notified Customs officers that the tomato paste could enter the country.

Summary of this case from United States v. Neustadt

In Anglo-American Overseas Corp. v. United States, 242 F.2d 236, 237 (2d Cir. 1957) (per curiam), the plaintiff, a merchant engaged in the purchase and sale of imported food products, contracted with the United States to sell tomato paste which had to be ordered from overseas.

Summary of this case from Cargill, Inc. v. United States
Case details for

Anglo-American and Overseas v. United States

Case Details

Full title:ANGLO-AMERICAN and OVERSEAS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Mar 4, 1957

Citations

242 F.2d 236 (2d Cir. 1957)

Citing Cases

United States v. Neustadt

We can discern no clear line running through these cases which serves as a guide to the solution of the…

United States v. Neustadt

207 F.2d ___, at 564. Following this interpretation, in an unbroken line, are the cases of National Mfg. Co.…