Claims and remanded the case to them with instructions to enter a judgment for the remaining $69,515. Subsequent developments This opinion established the principle that Congressional statutes providing remedial action should be construed liberally toward the aim of Congress' intent in passing the statute. It also articulated the principle that if an installment payment was not overdue at the time a suit was commenced, it was not time barred from being brought in a later suit. However, while such statutes are construed liberally, in Hartiens v. U.S., the Court of Claims narrowed the meaning of Cross, by limiting its action of re-reference to looking at false or fraudulent information from the first trial and not re-hearing the entire controversy. Further, in the later Paul v. U.S. matter, the court confirmed that the principles of res judicata and stare decisis do not apply in Congressional reference cases. References External links 1871 in United States case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Chase Court Government procurement in the United States