Maguire & Co. v. United States
Headline: Court affirms dismissal of buyer’s claim, ruling advertised weight of surplus waterproof fabric was an estimate not a warranty when inspection was invited and sale was 'as is'.
Holding:
- Treats advertised weights as estimates when inspection invited, limiting buyers' warranty claims.
- Requires buyers to inspect government surplus or accept sale outcomes without warranty.
Summary
Background
The Maguire Company, a New York corporation, bought a lot of surplus waterproof duck from the War Department’s Surplus Property Division after seeing an advertised list. The list described item No. 20 as 121,964 yards, 29 inches wide, olive drab, weight 12.4 ounces, and the accompanying letter said inspection was invited but bids would not be received subject to inspection. The company submitted a bid, which the Government accepted, the company paid, and the Government delivered the material. The Court of Claims found samples taken before and after delivery weighed 13.4 ounces or more, that there are no standard commercial weights for waterproof duck, and that commercial practice often sells such duck by sample without stating weight.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the listed weight or description amounted to a binding promise that could support a contract claim against the United States. The Court agreed with the Court of Claims that the weight listing was an estimate and not a warranty, given the notice that buyers could inspect and that bids would not be conditional on inspection. The opinion relied on an earlier decision holding that listed quantities and weights are estimates, not guarantees, and concluded the Government delivered the actual material described. The Supreme Court therefore affirmed the dismissal of Maguire Company’s claim and denied a remand for further fact-finding on pre-waterproofing weight.
Real world impact
This ruling confirms that when the Government advertises surplus goods with an invitation to inspect and states sales are not subject to inspection, listed weights or quantities are treated as estimates rather than binding warranties. Buyers of surplus government property who waive inspection may have little recourse for differences from advertised estimates.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?