Nelson v. United States

22 Ct. Cl. 159, 1887 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 48, 1800 WL 1668
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedMarch 21, 1887
DocketNo. 207, Congressional
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 22 Ct. Cl. 159 (Nelson 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
Nelson v. United States, 22 Ct. Cl. 159, 1887 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 48, 1800 WL 1668 (cc 1887).

Opinion

Eichaedson, Ch. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This case was reported to the court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Eepresentatives, December 22, 1884, under the provisions of the Bowman Act.

It appears that the claimant and John G-. Owen and Eichard G. Thomas claimed to be the owners of a large number of bales of cotton at Jackson, Tenn., which were taken by the Army of the United States about February, 1863, for use in the Army breastworks at that place.

[160]*160That after a few weeks said cotton was removed from the breastworks and stored, and all but four bales were returned to said owners.

That said four bales the provost-marshal refused to surrender, because, as he said, the Government cotton was' short four or five bales, and he was going to keep these to make up for losses. What became of the cotton does not appear.

The facts show that this case came within the jurisdiction of the Captured and Abandoned Property Act of March 12, 1863 (12 Stat. L., 820), the right to maintain actions under which expired in two years after the suppression of the rebellion.

The cause of action is therefore barred within the meaning of the Bowman Act (22 Stat. L., 485), for the reason given in the case of Topp & Vance v. The United States (21 C. Cls. B., 488), and the court having no jurisdiction thereof the case is dismissed.

The clerk will report a copy of the foregoing to the Committee on War Claims of the House of Bepresentatives.

Nott, J., was absent when the case was submitted, and took no part in the decision.

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

Related

Chase v. United States
50 Ct. Cl. 293 (Court of Claims, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 Ct. Cl. 159, 1887 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 48, 1800 WL 1668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-united-states-cc-1887.