Fox v. Ickes

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Fox v. Ickes

2 D.C. 26

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 1, 1935

DocketEquity No. 57738

StatusPublished

This text of 2 D.C. 26 (Fox v. Ickes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fox v. Ickes, 2 D.C. 26 (D.C. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

BAILEY, J.

It appears from the proposed amended bills that the orders made by the defendant are not authorized by Congress, and had they been so authorized, would have deprived the plaintiffs of vested rights. The suits are not brought against the United States but to set aside unauthorized acts of the defendant in cases in which he has no discretionary powers, and is acting arbitrarily.

The motions for .leave to file the amended bills will be granted.

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

BAILEY, J.

It appears from the proposed amended bills that the orders made by the defendant are not authorized by Congress, and had they been so authorized, would have deprived the plaintiffs of vested rights. The suits are not brought against the United States but to set aside unauthorized acts of the defendant in cases in which he has no discretionary powers, and is acting arbitrarily.

The motions for .leave to file the amended bills will be granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 D.C. 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fox-v-ickes-dc-1935.