Armstrong v. United States Case Brief

Facts of the Case

Under a Maine statute, whoever furnishes material for building a vessel has a lien on the vessel and on the material furnished. Materialmen, who had not been paid for supplies furnished to a contractor engaged in constructing vessels for the federal government, asserted liens on the supplies and the uncompleted vessels in which the supplies had been incorporated. Because title to these vessels transferred to the federal government, under a provision of the contract between the contractor and the government permitting the government to terminate the contract in case of the contractor’s default and require the contractor to transfer title to completed and uncompleted work and to manufacturing materials acquired by the contractor for building the vessels, the materialmen claimed a right to just compensation under thefor the value of their liens. The Court of Claims held that the materialmen never acquired valid liens on the uncompleted vessels or materials transferred to the government and denied compensation. On certiorari, the United States Supreme Court reversed the judgment.

Question

Did Ohio violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution by giving businesses tax incentives to expand their manufacturing operations inside Ohio?

CONCLUSION

0

Case Information

Citation: 364 US 40 (1960)
Argued: Mar 28, 1960
Decided: Jun 27, 1960
Case Brief: 1960