Legal Opinion
Hans Tiedemann v. Herbert P. Brownell, Attorney General and Successor to the Alien Property Custodian
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided April 21, 1955No. 12466PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FAHY, Circuit Judge.
The Alien Property Custodian in 1946 vested some $30,000 in appellant’s checking account in a New York bank. Appellant filed a claim with the Custodian for its return. A hearing on the claim was held before a Hearing Examiner under procedures established pursuant to the Trading with the Enemy Act. 1 He decided that though appellant was ineligible to recover under Section 9(a) of the Act because he was an “enemy” within Section 2(a), he was eligible to recover under Section 32(a), authorizing the return of vested property to one who, though a “technical” enemy, does not…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. Chemical Foundation, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Cummings v. Deutsche Bank Und DiscontogesellschaftSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- General Motors Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Pflueger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
3Cited by7 opinions
- Dr. Endre Ungar v. William French Smith, Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
- Helmut Legerlotz v. William P. Rogers, Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1959
- N. v. Handelsbureau La Mola v. Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States, as Successor to the Alien Property CustodianCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1962
- La Due & Co. v. William P. Rogers, Attorney General, as Successor to the Alien Property CustodianCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1958
- Margot Von Opel v. Uebersee Finanz Korporation, A. G. Liestal, SwitzerlandCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1955
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.