Bliss v. United States
| Decision Date | 14 April 1888 |
| Citation | 34 F. 781 |
| Parties | BLISS v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
William H. Bliss, pro se.
Thomas P. Bashaw, Dist. Atty., and Thomas M. Knapp, Asst. Dist Atty., for the United States.
In the case of William H. Bliss v. United States, there is a plea to the jurisdiction of this court. The action is one against the United States, to recover for services as United States district attorney, and under special employment. It is brought under the act of March 3, 1887, which gives to the circuit courts jurisdiction of claims against the United States, with this proviso:
'Provided however, that nothing in this section shall be construed as giving either of the courts herein mentioned jurisdiction to hear and determine claims growing out of the late civil war, commonly known as 'war claims,' or to hear and determine other claims which have heretofore been rejected or reported on adversely by any court, department, or commission authorized to hear and determine the same.'
The plea is one running to the entire petition, there being several counts; and it rests upon this last proposition, that this court has no jurisdiction in cases where the claims have been heretofore rejected or reported on adversely by any court, department, or commission authorized to hear and determine the same. It appears from the amended petition that the treasury department refuses to pay any of these claims. That the comptroller is an officer having such charge of the adjustment and settlement of accounts against the government that his action amounts to that of the treasury department in rejecting a claim, is, we think, clear. Section 2169 gives to him the power and makes it his duty to superintend the adjustment and preservation of the public accounts, subject to his revision. Section 191, after providing for the presentation of claims, declares: 'But the decision thereon shall be final and conclusive as hereinbefore provided. ' That is, he is the officer of the treasury department to whom the subject of accounts is intrusted, and when he acts upon those accounts, it is the action of the department. When he rejects an account, it may be said, within the scope of this act of 1887, that there has been a rejection by a department authorized to hear and determine the same. Plaintiff insists that this language in the act of 1887 implies a judgment, or that which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harmon v. United States
... ... of this proviso, there has been a diversity of judicial ... opinion. The circuit court for the eastern district of ... Missouri held that it was, and its decision was followed by ... the district court in this district, as well as in the ... eastern district of Missouri. Bliss v. U.S., 34 F ... 781; Rand v. U.S., 36 F. 671; Preston v ... U.S., 37 F. 417. But the opposite view has since been ... maintained, on fuller consideration, by the district court in ... Connecticut, in Georgia, and in Illinois. Stanton v. U.S., ... Id. 252; Erwin v. U.S., Id. 470; Hoyne ... ...
-
Rand v. United States
...A portion of these items were included in the proceeding by this same petitioner in 1888, and was then, upon the authority of Bliss v. U.S., 34 F. 781, held not be within the jurisdiction of this court. Rand v. U.S., 36 F. 671. Such disposition of the claim for supposed want of jurisdiction......
-
United States v. Rand, 24.
...A portion of these items were included in the proceeding by this same petitioner in 1888, and was then, upon the authority of Bliss v. U.S., 34 F. 781, held not be within the jurisdiction of this court. Rand v. U.S., 36 F. 671. Such disposition of the claim for supposed want of jurisdiction......
-
Van Buren v. United States
...the passage of the act of congress; and consequently the case is not within the interpretation placed on the proviso of that act in Bliss v. U.S. 34 F. 781. It is shown that plaintiff was engaged in the hearing in question for 12 days; and, as it does not appear when the question of jurisdi......