Sutcliffe (P) leased premises to the U.S. Navy (D) for a series of periods starting in 1942. The Navy occupied and used a greater area than was designated in the lease and D sued for the reasonable value of the extra use. D filed four separate causes of action corresponding the periods of time for the lease of the same building at the same rates. The Tucker Act limited claims to $10,000 and claims for greater amounts must be tried in Washington and P wanted to sue in a local court. D asserted the general rule for splitting causes of action in that the existence of separate renewal leases for the adjoining premises does not affect the nature of P's claim. D claimed that the areas were included in the leases and that if not the contract should be reformed to include them. D answered the last three actions with a separate defense of pendency. Those three cases were dismissed. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.