U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1949

Matthews v. Walton Rice Mill, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided July 5, 1949

176 F.2d 69; 85 U.S. App. D.C. 197; 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 3006 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. L. Clark Ewing, Assistant United States Attorney, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. George Morris Fay, United States Attorney, John D. Lane and Harvey M. Spear, Assistant United States Attorneys, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellant. Messrs. Sidney S. Sachs and John P. Burke, Assistant United States Attorneys, Washington, D. C., also entered appearances for appellant., Mr. Cornelius H. Doherty, Washington, D. G, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

J. Samuel Wacker v. J. G. Bisson, Consul General, Dominion of Canada (5th Cir. 1965)
Hugo Princz v. Federal Republic of Germany (D.C. Cir. 1994)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This case presents the question whether an action at law may be maintained in the United States District Court by a citizen of the United States against a foreign government without its consent. The same question was presented upon a similar state of facts in the case of United States ex rel. Cardashian v. Snyder, et al., 1930, 59 App.D.C. 387, 44 F.2d 895, certiorari denied, 283 U.S. 827, 51 S.Ct 351, 75 L.Ed. 1440. There the court held that such a suit could not be maintained. We adhere to that decision.

Therefore, this action is remanded with directions to set aside the judgment for the plaintiff (appellee) and dismiss the action with prejudice.

Reversed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.