United States v. Shafter
This text of 424 F.2d 281 (United States v. Shafter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Although we affirmed this case in open court we believe it advisable briefly to set forth our reasons.
We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal on two alternate grounds: (1) on the assumption that the application before the lower court may be treated as one for intervention as of right, and (2) that the proper evidence of substitution of attorneys and representatives, though not before Judge Mansfield at the time of his opinion, has been subsequently filed.
Upon the merits, we affirm on Judge Mansfield’s thorough opinion, reported at 49 F.R.D. 164 (1969). We believe that the wrongful death and personal injury counterclaim was covered by the NATO-SOFA agreement, and thus not within the jurisdiction of the [282]*282District Court.1 See Shafter v. United States, 273 F.Supp. 152, 153-156 (S.D.N.Y.1967), aff'd per curiam, 400 F.2d 584 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1086, 89 S.Ct. 871, 21 L.Ed.2d 779 (1969).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
424 F.2d 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-shafter-ca2-1970.