Viewing page 118 of 131

- 105 -


There were pending during the period ending April 1990 ten cases to which the Smithsonian was a party:


[[underlined]] The Davis Corporation v. United States [[/underlined]] (default of contractor) 


[[underlined]] Dickson V. Smithsonian Institution [[/underlined]] (discrimination on the basis of race [white])

[[underlined]] Janczewski v. Secretary, Smithsonian Institution [[/underlined]] (sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of sex)

[[underlined]] Solomon v. Secretary, Smithsonian Institution [[/underlined]] (discrimination on the basis on handicap/reprisal)


[[underlined]] Beatty v. Smithsonian Institution [[/underlined]] (Indian relics)

[[underlined]] In re the Estate of William H. Burnette [[/underlined]] (artwork/WW I memorabilia)

Tort actions:

[[underlined]] Elliott v. United States [[/underlined]] (injuries sustained by a minor from a fall from "Uncle Beasley")

[[underlined]] Kaufman v. Payton [[/underlined]] (claim for injuries allegedly sustained in an accident involving a Smithsonian employee)

[[underlined]] Mac'Avoy v. The Smithsonian Institution [[/underlined]] (claim contesting the National Museum of American Art's ownership of certain paintings and drawings by Romaine Brooks that were donated to the Museum between 1966 and 1970)

[[underlined]] United States v. Rogers Electric Company [[/underlined]] (counterclaims by subcontractor sued by the U.S. for improper storage/disposal of PCBs)

Settlement negotiations are proceeding in [[underlined]] The Davis Corporation [[/underlined]] case, which was filed in the U.S. Claims Court in June 1988 seeking $12 million in damages for the July 1987 default by the General Services Administration of the contract for the construction of the storage system inside the Smithsonian's Museum Support Center in Suitland, Maryland.

In [[underlined]] Solomon [[/underlined]], the Motion for Summary Affirmance of the June 21, 1989, judgment in favor of the Smithsonian was granted on February 26, 1990, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact