Rice v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters1 statement of the case: The case, so far as it is determined, turned entirely upon questions of law which were presented by the respective cbunsel and will be found stated in the opinon of the court.
1Dissent
Nott, J.,
delivered the following dissenting opinion:
The plain and simple question in this case is whether the statute of limitations (Rev. Stat., § 1069) applies to that subject of jurisdiction known as the captured property cases.
In Haycraft's Case (22 Wall., 81) the counsel for the claimant asked the same question, and the Supreme Courtanswered that it did not.
The argument which was addressed to the Supreme Court in that case will be found set forth (not in extenso) in 10 C. Cls. R., 95-104. It is an argument of extraordinary ingenuity, ability, learning, and earnestness. There have been…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Haycraft v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Ex Parte ZellnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Hobbs v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1884
- Haycraft v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Tibbetts v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1864
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.