KOLLER v. UNITED STATES

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

KOLLER v. UNITED STATES, (1959)

No. 362

Argued:     Decided: April 20, 1959

A suit for damages under 26 (b) (1) of the Surplus Property Act is not a suit to enforce a civil fine, penalty or forfeiture and, therefore, is not subject to the five-year limitation of 28 U.S.C. 2462. Rex Trailer Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 148 .

255 F.2d 865, affirmed.

Robert H. Malis argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioners.

Lionel Kestenbaum argued the cause for the United States. On the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Doub and Samuel D. Slade.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed. Rex Trailer Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 148 (1956).

MR. JUSTICE STEWART, with whom MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE WHITTAKER join, dissenting.

I do not agree that disposition of this case is controlled by the decision in Rex Trailer Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 148 . Believing that 26 (b) (1) of the Surplus Property Act of 1944, 40 U.S.C. 489 (b) (1), imposes a civil penalty, and that an action thereunder is therefore subject to the five-year limitation provided in 28 U.S.C. 2462, I would reverse. Cf. United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537 ; Erie Basin Metal Products, Inc., v. United States, 150 F. Supp. 561 (Ct. Cl.). See Priebe & Sons v. United States, 332 U.S. 407 . [359 U.S. 309, 310]  

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More