United States v. Twenty-Five Thousand Segars

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York

United States v. Twenty-Five Thousand Segars

28 F. Cas. 276, 5 Blatchf. 500, 1867 U.S. App. LEXIS 807

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York

DecidedOctober 14, 1867

StatusPublished

This text of 28 F. Cas. 276 (United States v. Twenty-Five Thousand Segars) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Twenty-Five Thousand Segars, 28 F. Cas. 276, 5 Blatchf. 500, 1867 U.S. App. LEXIS 807 (circtedny 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

BENEDICT, District Judge.

This motion presents the question, whether the treasury circular of September 2, 1867, respecting the shares of informers, in cases of forfeiture under the internal revenue laws, is applicable to a case where the proceeds of the forfeiture had been received by the marshal prior to the issuing of that circular. The same question has recently been considered by Judge Blatch-ford. in the district court for the Southern district of New York, in the Case of Eight Barrels of Distilled Spirits [Case No. 4,316], and I concur with him in the conclusion, that the right of the informer became fixed on the receipt by the marshal of the money, and that the subsequent circular of the secretary of the treasury can have no effect to reduce the amount to which, under the then existing regulation, the informer was entitled. The distribution in this ease will, therefore, be made in accordance with that view.

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

BENEDICT, District Judge.

This motion presents the question, whether the treasury circular of September 2, 1867, respecting the shares of informers, in cases of forfeiture under the internal revenue laws, is applicable to a case where the proceeds of the forfeiture had been received by the marshal prior to the issuing of that circular. The same question has recently been considered by Judge Blatch-ford. in the district court for the Southern district of New York, in the Case of Eight Barrels of Distilled Spirits [Case No. 4,316], and I concur with him in the conclusion, that the right of the informer became fixed on the receipt by the marshal of the money, and that the subsequent circular of the secretary of the treasury can have no effect to reduce the amount to which, under the then existing regulation, the informer was entitled. The distribution in this ease will, therefore, be made in accordance with that view.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 F. Cas. 276, 5 Blatchf. 500, 1867 U.S. App. LEXIS 807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-twenty-five-thousand-segars-circtedny-1867.