Legal Opinion

United States v. Tarcuanu

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided February 5, 1935PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

BONDY, District Judge.

This is a motion for an order vacating service of the summons in a civil action on the ground that the defendant is a duly accredited vice consul, and in charge of the Royal Consulate General of the kingdom o£ Roumania, in the city of New York. As the summons was served without a complaint, the nature of the action does not appear.

“Consuls, as such, and unless expressly invested with a diplomatic character in addition to their ordinary powers, are not considered as intrusted with authority to represent their sovereign in his intercourse with foreign states, or to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. Wong Kim ArkSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. Froment v. DuclosDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1887
  3. Herman v. ApetzNew York Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Moracchini v. MoracchiniNew York Supreme Court · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Auer v. CostaDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API