TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Erwin v. United States

Robert Erwin v. United States

Erwin v. United States, 14 Ct. Cl. 577 (1878)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
December 2, 1878
Judges
Fieed
Citations
14 Ct. Cl. 577
Syllabus
On the claimcmfs Appeal. A member of a copartnership owns cotton, which is captured. Subsequently the firm-goes into banlvruptcy, amd the partnership and individual assets are assigned. The schedules of individual assets contain this claim; but the copy given to the assignee does not contain the item, andhe is, in fact, ignorant of it. He sells amd transfers to the partner who owned the cotton “ all the remaining assets of the late firm.” A private act is passed authorizing the court below to take-' jurisdiction of the claim under the provisions of the Abandoned or captured property Act. The claimant brings his suit for the proceeds of the cotton. The court helow holds: (1) That the owner of captured cotton who can trace the proceeds of his property into the Treasury has a proprietary interest in them, which, under an assignment in bankruptcy, passed to the assignee; (2) That such interest, being vested in the assignee, was not retransferred to the claimant (the bankrupt) by the alleged sale and transfer by the assignee; (3) That the Act February 5,1877, “for relief of Robert Fnvin” (19 Stat. L., 509), does not enlarge the rights of the claimant to the proceeds of his cotton in the Treasury. Judgment for the defendants. The claimant appeals. The judgment of the court below is affirmed on the same grounds. The Supreme Court also holds that the Act to prevent frauds upon the Treasury, 26th February, 1853 (10 Stat. L., p. 170) does not prohibit the transfer of a claim by operation of law.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Fieed

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Mr. Justice Fieed

delivered tb.e opinion of the Supreme Court, December 2, 1878.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2001: 12005: 12007: 12008: 12009: 120012026peak 2001 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST v. UNITED STATES243 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2001)
  2. Bailey v. United States78 Fed. Cl. 239 (Fed. Cl. 2007)
  3. L-3 Communications Integrated Systems v. United States84 Fed. Cl. 768 (Fed. Cl. 2008)
  4. Webster v. United States90 Fed. Cl. 107 (Fed. Cl. 2009)
  5. Cooper v. United States362 F. Supp. 2d 649 (W.D.N.C. 2005)

Most recent

  1. Webster v. United States90 Fed. Cl. 107 (Fed. Cl. 2009)
  2. L-3 Communications Integrated Systems v. United States84 Fed. Cl. 768 (Fed. Cl. 2008)
  3. Bailey v. United States78 Fed. Cl. 239 (Fed. Cl. 2007)
  4. Cooper v. United States362 F. Supp. 2d 649 (W.D.N.C. 2005)
  5. INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST v. UNITED STATES243 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2001)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list