Wells v. Roper

Background

A contractor agreed in 1913 to supply automobiles with chauffeurs to collect and deliver mail in Washington, D.C., and spent substantial money preparing to perform the work. The contract included a clause letting the Postmaster General discontinue the equipment on ninety days’ notice and treated acts by the First Assistant Postmaster General as the Postmaster General’s acts. After nearly two years, the Post Office invoked a 1914 appropriation to start an experimental city collection service and the First Assistant Postmaster General notified the contractor the service would end and the contract would be canceled.

Reasoning

The contractor sued in equity to block the cancellation and force continued performance. The courts below dismissed the suit, and this Court agreed. The justices explained that the requested injunction would effectively require the United States to accept continued contract performance and would directly interfere with executive decisionmaking. Because the United States’ interests were necessarily involved and the action attacked official, discretionary conduct, the suit was in effect against the Government and could not proceed without the Government’s consent.

Real world impact

The decision means contractors generally cannot use an equity injunction against a federal official to force ongoing performance of a government contract. It resolves a procedural question, not whether the cancellation breached the contract on the merits. Contractors seeking money or other relief against the United States must use the forums and procedures the Government has consented to, such as claims courts or other authorized remedies.