Braunschweiger v. United States

Court of Claims

Braunschweiger v. United States

118 Ct. Cl. 289, 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 103, 1951 WL 5385

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedJanuary 9, 1951

DocketNo. 49651

StatusPublished

This text of 118 Ct. Cl. 289 (Braunschweiger v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Braunschweiger v. United States, 118 Ct. Cl. 289, 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 103, 1951 WL 5385 (cc 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

[290]*290It is clear that this court has no jurisdiction of the subject matter. It has been held that this court has no jurisdiction under the Trading with the Enemy Act, 40 Stat. 411, as amended, 60 Stat. 925, since the Congress placed exclusive jurisdiction in the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia to review disallowance of claims by the Alien Property Custodian.

In giving consent to be sued in this court in certain classes of claims the act conferring jurisdiction on this court contains the following restriction, which is'found in 28 U.'S. C., Sec. 2501, and which states in part that

Every claim of which the Court of Claims has jurisdiction shall be barred unless the petition thereon is filed, or the claim is referred by the Senate or House of Representatives, or by the head of an executive department within six years after such claim first accrues.

For both these reasons this court is precluded from considering the claim of plaintiff and from passing judgment thereon. Consequently we do not pass upon the second ground of the demurrer.

The demurrer is sustained and the petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[290]*290It is clear that this court has no jurisdiction of the subject matter. It has been held that this court has no jurisdiction under the Trading with the Enemy Act, 40 Stat. 411, as amended, 60 Stat. 925, since the Congress placed exclusive jurisdiction in the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia to review disallowance of claims by the Alien Property Custodian.

In giving consent to be sued in this court in certain classes of claims the act conferring jurisdiction on this court contains the following restriction, which is'found in 28 U.'S. C., Sec. 2501, and which states in part that

Every claim of which the Court of Claims has jurisdiction shall be barred unless the petition thereon is filed, or the claim is referred by the Senate or House of Representatives, or by the head of an executive department within six years after such claim first accrues.

For both these reasons this court is precluded from considering the claim of plaintiff and from passing judgment thereon. Consequently we do not pass upon the second ground of the demurrer.

The demurrer is sustained and the petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 Ct. Cl. 289, 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 103, 1951 WL 5385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/braunschweiger-v-united-states-cc-1951.