Legal Opinion
Nurge v. Miller
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided March 16, 1923PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, District Judge.
This is á suit brought under section 9 of the Trading with the Enemy Act, as amended (41 Stat. 977), to recover certain property seized by the Alien Property Custodian under the provisions of that act. The question involved in this suit is not one of wrongful seizure of property by the Alien Property Custodian, because, under the provisions of section 2 of the Trading with the Enemy Act (Comp. St. 1918, Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 3115%aa), the plaintiff herein was unquestionably an enemy at the time the property was seized. The question is whether, under the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- MacKenzie v. HareSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- United States ex rel. Anderson v. HoweDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1916
- Banning v. PenroseDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1919
- Stein v. Fleischmann Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1916
- Sinjen v. MillerDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rueff v. BrownellDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1953
- Rosasco v. BrownellDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1958
- In re AlfonsoDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1953
- D. Signore Et Ux. v. Vulc. Det. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933