Auer v. Costa, 7242.

Decision Date11 April 1938
Docket NumberNo. 7242.,7242.
PartiesAUER v. COSTA et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

Sahagen & Hadge, of Boston, Mass., for plaintiff.

Antonio De J. Cardozo, of Boston, Mass., for defendant.

McLELLAN, District Judge.

This is an action against the Portuguese consul at Boston, in which funds in the First National Bank of Boston have been trusteed. Two motions were marked for a hearing. The first, entitled "Motion to Discharge Attachment," is filed on behalf of the defendant, and alleges that the funds attached by the plaintiff do not belong to the defendant but to the republic of Portugal. The second entitled "Application for the Discharge of the Attachment," is made by the Minister Plenipotentiary of Portugal, and also states that the funds belong to the republic of Portugal.

Massachusetts General Laws (Ter. Ed.) c. 246, § 33, furnishes a method of relief for adverse claimants to funds attached by trustee process. There it is provided: "If a person claiming, by assignment from the defendant or otherwise, goods, effects or credits in the hands of the supposed trustee enters an appearance, he shall be admitted as a party in order to determine his title to such goods, effects or credits, and may allege and prove any facts which have not been stated or denied by the supposed trustee. Such allegations shall be tried and determined as provided in section seventeen upon depositions or oral testimony as the court orders. If he does not voluntarily enter an appearance, the court may issue an order of notice to him."

While consuls of foreign countries are not entitled to the immunity from suit accorded to ambassadors and ministers by U.S.C., title 22, § 252, 22 U.S.C.A. § 252, and by international law (see United States v. Tarcuanu, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 1935, 10 F.Supp. 445; United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. 890), the property of a foreign government is exempt from seizure or attachment in domestic courts (Oliver American Trading Company v. Mexico, 2 Cir., 5 F.2d 659; Mason v. Intercolonial Railway of Canada, 197 Mass. 349, 83 N.E. 876, 16 L.R.A.,N.S., 276, 125 Am.St.Rep. 371, 14 Ann.Cas. 574). Basing my conclusion on the affidavits on file and oral testimony, including that of the defendant, I find that the attached deposit is made up of money belonging to the republic of Portugal. While the account stands in the defendant's name and he may draw upon it with the consent of his government, the account is not his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Illinois Commerce Commission v. Salamie
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 20, 1977
    ...and vice consuls are not ambassadors or public ministers. (Carrera v. Carrera (1949), 84 U.S.App.D.C. 333, 174 F.2d 496; Auer v. Costa (D.Mass.1938), 23 F.Supp. 22.) Indeed, the United States Constitution in article III refers to ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls. The menti......
  • Stuart v. St. Regis Paper Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • January 28, 1952
    ...neither supplied with nor inserted in the writ. Cf. Ferguson and Company, Inc., v. Melillo, 266 Mass. 197, 198, 165 N.E. 18; Auer v. Costa, D.C. Mass., 23 F.Supp. 22. The writ was served on the defendant October 29, 1951 and was made returnable December 3, 1951. On December 3, 1951 the writ......
  • Bergman v. De Sieyes
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • December 30, 1946
    ...Consuls, however, are not considered by our courts to be entitled to the immunities and privileges of foreign ministers. Auer v. Costa, D.C.D.Mass., 23 F.Supp. 22, 23. There are additional modern text writers and other authorities which should be In his treatise on International Law, publis......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT