Douglass v. United States

Court of Claims

Douglass v. United States

7 Ct. Cl. 604

DecidedDecember 15, 1871

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Ct. Cl. 604 (Douglass 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

Douglass v. United States, 7 Ct. Cl. 604 (cc 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee CuriaM.

The petition claims of the United States the net proceeds of thirty-five bales of cotton captured at Savannah, Georgia, and, on examination of the record, the court finds that the claimant was the lawful owner of thirty-five bales of cotton, which were seized by the United States forces in February, 1864. The return of the Treasury Department shows the same number of bales were received by the United States, hut that a portion of them was burned before their shipment. The record is silent as to the circumstances amid which the fire occurred or the quantity consumed, and, under the rale in O’Keefe's Case, (5 C. Cls. It., 674,) we can pronounce no judgment until this defect in the proof is supplied. The case is, therefore, remanded to the general docket, with leave to take testimony to show the quantity, or proportional quantity, of cotton consumed at the fire aforesaid.

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

Pee CuriaM.

The petition claims of the United States the net proceeds of thirty-five bales of cotton captured at Savannah, Georgia, and, on examination of the record, the court finds that the claimant was the lawful owner of thirty-five bales of cotton, which were seized by the United States forces in February, 1864. The return of the Treasury Department shows the same number of bales were received by the United States, hut that a portion of them was burned before their shipment. The record is silent as to the circumstances amid which the fire occurred or the quantity consumed, and, under the rale in O’Keefe's Case, (5 C. Cls. It., 674,) we can pronounce no judgment until this defect in the proof is supplied. The case is, therefore, remanded to the general docket, with leave to take testimony to show the quantity, or proportional quantity, of cotton consumed at the fire aforesaid.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Ct. Cl. 604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglass-v-united-states-cc-1871.