Conyugal Partnership v. Gracia

D. Puerto Rico

Conyugal Partnership v. Gracia

331 F. Supp. 521, 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11407

CourtDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico

DecidedOctober 1, 1971

DocketCiv. 288-71

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 331 F. Supp. 521 (Conyugal Partnership v. Gracia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Puerto Rico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Conyugal Partnership v. Gracia, 331 F. Supp. 521, 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11407 (prd 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

FERNANDEZ-BADILLO, District Judge.

The present case was removed from the Superior Court of Puerto Rico, Bayamón Part, to this Court pursuant to petition for removal filed on April 20, 1971 by United States of America on behalf of the United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration.

Defendants Jesús Gracia, United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration filed on July 28, 1971 a motion to dismiss and plaintiffs filed their opposition thereto on September 8, 1971.

The Court being fully advised in the premises determines that the motion to dismiss is well taken as to the United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration for they are nonsuable governmental agencies and therefore this Court lacks jurisdiction over them. See Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512, 514, 515, 72 S.Ct. 410, 96 L.Ed. 534; United States Dept, of Agriculture, Emergency Crop & Feed Loans v. Remund, 330 U.S. 539, 67 S.Ct. 891, 91 L.Ed. 1082; United States ex rel. and for use of T. V. A. v. Easement and Right of Way, 204 F.Supp. 837 (E.D.Tenn.); Winneshiek Mut. Ins. Assn. v. FHA, 233 F.Supp. 691 (N.D.Iowa).

If the present complaint were to be considered an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act, this Court would also lack jurisdiction because plaintiff did not file an administrative claim as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a). Furthermore, this Court would be also without jurisdiction if the action were to be considered under the Tucker Act, because it is for more than $10,000 and therefore it must be brought in the Court of Claims. United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 591-592, 61 S.Ct. 767, 85 L.Ed. 1058.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the action herein be dismissed as to the United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration.

It is so ordered.

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

ORDER

FERNANDEZ-BADILLO, District Judge.

The present case was removed from the Superior Court of Puerto Rico, Bayamón Part, to this Court pursuant to petition for removal filed on April 20, 1971 by United States of America on behalf of the United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration.

Defendants Jesús Gracia, United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration filed on July 28, 1971 a motion to dismiss and plaintiffs filed their opposition thereto on September 8, 1971.

The Court being fully advised in the premises determines that the motion to dismiss is well taken as to the United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration for they are nonsuable governmental agencies and therefore this Court lacks jurisdiction over them. See Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512, 514, 515, 72 S.Ct. 410, 96 L.Ed. 534; United States Dept, of Agriculture, Emergency Crop & Feed Loans v. Remund, 330 U.S. 539, 67 S.Ct. 891, 91 L.Ed. 1082; United States ex rel. and for use of T. V. A. v. Easement and Right of Way, 204 F.Supp. 837 (E.D.Tenn.); Winneshiek Mut. Ins. Assn. v. FHA, 233 F.Supp. 691 (N.D.Iowa).

If the present complaint were to be considered an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act, this Court would also lack jurisdiction because plaintiff did not file an administrative claim as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a). Furthermore, this Court would be also without jurisdiction if the action were to be considered under the Tucker Act, because it is for more than $10,000 and therefore it must be brought in the Court of Claims. United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 591-592, 61 S.Ct. 767, 85 L.Ed. 1058.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the action herein be dismissed as to the United States Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration.

It is so ordered.

Owyhee Grazing Association, Inc. v. William O. Field, Oscar Field, Terry Field, Newton Wright, Roy Draper, Chetstahn, Butch Glenski, Keith Johnson, Sherman Nesbitt, Frank Pike, Mrs. Frank(darcell) Pike, and All Others, Individuals, Purporting to Act as Members, Shareholders,officers or Directors of the Owyhee Grazing Association, Inc., and Gerald Cunningham and Gary Cunningham, Owyhee Brazing Association, Inc. v. William O. Field, Oscar Field, Terry Field, Gerald Cunningham, Gary Cunningham, Newton Wright, Roy Draper, Chet Stahn, Butch Glenski, Keith Johnson, Shermannesbitt, Frank Pike, Mrs. Frank (Darcell) Pike, and All Others, Individuals,purportingto Act as Members, Shareholders, Officers or Directors of the Owyhee Grazingassociation, Inc., and Elwood Thueson, Gaylord K. Harward and the Owyhee County Office of the Farmershome Administration, Owyhee Grazing Association, Inc. v. William O. Field, Oscar Field, and Terry Field, and Newton Wright, Roy Draper, Chet Stahn, Butch Glenski, Keith Johnson, Shermannesbitt, Frank Pike, Mrs. Fran (Darcell) Pike, and All Others, Individuals,purporting to Act as Members, Shareholders, Officers or Directors of the Owyheegrazingassociation, Inc.

637 F.2d 694 (Ninth Circuit, 1981)

Hartke v. Federal Aviation Administration

369 F. Supp. 741 (E.D. New York, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

331 F. Supp. 521, 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conyugal-partnership-v-gracia-prd-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack