Downs v. United States

Sixth Circuit

Downs v. United States

102 F.2d 984, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 3987

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 14, 1939

DocketNo. 7759

StatusPublished

This text of 102 F.2d 984 (Downs v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Downs v. United States, 102 F.2d 984, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 3987 (6th Cir. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The court being of the opinion that the letter dated March 23, 1933, from the Veterans Administration to the Fifth-Third Union Trust Company, Guardian, did not constitute a denial of the claim sued on (Section 19 of the World War Veterans’ Act 1924, as amended by Act July 3, 1930, 38 U.S.C. § 445, 38 U.S.C.A. § 445; Act June 29, 1936, ch. 867, § 404, 49 Stat. 2034, 38 U.S.C. § 445d, 38 U.S.C.A. § 445d) so as to confer jurisdiction of this cause upon the District Court, it is therefore ordered and adjudged that the order appealed from be and the same is affirmed.

The court, for the reasons indicated, being without jurisdiction to consider it, does not pass upon the question whether appellant’s claim is barred by the pertinent provisions of the statute of limitations (Sec. 445, Tit. 38 U.S.C., 38 U.S.C.A. § 445).

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

PER CURIAM.

The court being of the opinion that the letter dated March 23, 1933, from the Veterans Administration to the Fifth-Third Union Trust Company, Guardian, did not constitute a denial of the claim sued on (Section 19 of the World War Veterans’ Act 1924, as amended by Act July 3, 1930, 38 U.S.C. § 445, 38 U.S.C.A. § 445; Act June 29, 1936, ch. 867, § 404, 49 Stat. 2034, 38 U.S.C. § 445d, 38 U.S.C.A. § 445d) so as to confer jurisdiction of this cause upon the District Court, it is therefore ordered and adjudged that the order appealed from be and the same is affirmed.

The court, for the reasons indicated, being without jurisdiction to consider it, does not pass upon the question whether appellant’s claim is barred by the pertinent provisions of the statute of limitations (Sec. 445, Tit. 38 U.S.C., 38 U.S.C.A. § 445).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 F.2d 984, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 3987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/downs-v-united-states-ca6-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack