U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1957

Otto Rusche v. Herbert Brownell, Jr., Attorney General of the United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided May 23, 1957 · Edgerton, Prettyman, Fahy

244 F.2d 782; 100 U.S. App. D.C. 334; 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3160 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. George Eric Rosden, Washington, D. C., for appellant., Mr. Samuel Z. Gordon, of the bar of the Court of Appeals of New York, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court, with whom Messrs. George B. Searls and Irwin A. Seibel, Attys., Dept, of Justice, were on the brief, for appellees. Mr. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Mr. Lewis Carroll, Asst. U. S. Atty., also entered appearances for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

J. Robert Bonnar v. The United States (Court of Claims 1971)
Von Clemm v. Smith (District Court, S.D. New York 1965)

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals from a judgment for the defendant in a suit brought under § 9(a) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, 40 Stat. 411, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 9(a), for the recovery of property vested by the Attorney General in 1950 and 1951 on his finding that it was enemy owned. We find no error affecting substantial rights.

Affirmed.

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