Legal Opinion
Kombst v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided November 2, 1931No. J-679PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WHALEY, Judge.
The facts in this case, which were stipulated, disclose that the property of the plaintiffs was seized, confiscated, and impounded by the President of the United States, acting through the Alien Property Custodian and at the present time the corpus of the legacies is still held by him and cannot be returned to them until further legislative enactment by Congress. Trading with the Enemy Act, Oct. 6, 1917, c. 106, 40 Stat. 411, amended Act March 28, 1918, c. 28, 40 Stat. 459, 460; Act Nov. 4, 1918, c. 201, 40 Stat. 1020; Act July 11, 1919, c. 6, 41 Stat. 35; Act June 5, 1920, c.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- United States v. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Central Union Trust Co. of NY v. GarvanSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Stoehr v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Herbert v. RiddellDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1952
- Chemische Fabrik Von Heyden Aktiengesellschaft v. TaitDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1932