Legal Opinion

Orvis v. McGrath Atty. Gen

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided June 30, 1952No. 22340_1PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

1. The Custodian argues that the court below had no jurisdiction of this suit because of § 34(f), 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 34(f), which provides for judicial review in the District of Columbia exclusively. But § 34(i) says that no person asserting “any interest, right, or title” in property acquired by the Custodian shall be barred from proceeding for its return pursuant to the Act by reason of any proceeding he may have brought pursuant to § 34. Ac cordingly, if the plaintiff had an “interest, right, or title”, he could properly maintain his suit in the court below,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Propper v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Zittman v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. Zittman v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  4. Clark v. PropperCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Orvis v. BrownellSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. State of the Netherlands v. Federal Reserve Bank of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
  3. Taterka v. BrownellDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1956
  4. In re the Accounting of MulliganNew York Surrogate's Court · 1952
  5. Orvis v. BrownellSupreme Court of the United States · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API