Legal Opinion
Dale v. Hartson
District Court, E.D. Washington
Decided May 2, 1923No. 4202PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtNeterer, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1] The forfeiture’is a summary proceeding to divest the owner of-title to property by virtue of power given under the Tariff Act, which confers the power and provides means for enforcing such power, and must be strictly construed, -and such provision is controlling. In U. S. v. Hydes (D. C.) 267 Fed. 470, at page 471, I said:
“Under various acts of Congress, property may be seized. Each act has a procedure applicable to its own provision. Under Act March 2, 1799, 1 Stat. 678, 3 Fed. Stat. Annot.. 95, the right to libel was absolute, and dependent upon…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- The Josefa SegundaSupreme Court of the United States · 1825
- United States v. HydesDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1920
- United States v. Two Hundred & Sixty-Seven Twenty-Dollar Gold PiecesDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1919
- United States v. One Certain Six-Passenger, Six-Cylinder, Forty-Eight Horse Power LocomobileDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1917
3Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. One Cadillac CoupeDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1945