Eastern Grain Co. v. Currier

• Decision Date: 02 March 1954
• Citation: 98 N.H. 495,103 A.2d 84
• Parties: EASTERN GRAIN CO. v. CURRIER et al.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

Page 84

103 A.2d 84

98 N.H. 495

EASTERN GRAIN CO. v. CURRIER et al.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

Argued Feb. 2, 1954.

Decided March 2, 1954.

McLane, Davis, Carleton & Graf, Stanley M. Brown and Weslev E. Whitney, Manchester, for plaintiff.

Robert D. Branch, Asst. U. S. Atty., Concord (by brief and orally), for defendant trustee.

Grinnell & Grinnell, Derry, for principal defendants, filed no brief.

BLANDIN, Justice.

It is established beyond question that the United States cannot be sued without its consent. Dalehite v. United States, 346 U.S. 15, 73 S.Ct. 956, 97 L.Ed. 1427. It is equally clear that this immunity extends to agencies of the government when the relief sought is actually against the sovereign. Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Corp., 337 U.S. 682, 69 S.Ct. 1457, 93 L.Ed. 1628. Since the trustee process here is in effect a suit against the sovereign, Federal Housing Administration Region No. 4 v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242, 60 S.Ct. 488, 84 L.Ed. 724; Moore v. Dailey, 97 N.H. 278, 86 A.2d 342, it follows that it is barred unless governmental immunity has been waived in 'explicit language' as suggested in Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512, 515, 72 S.Ct. 410, 96 L.Ed. 534, or at least by implication of such reasonable clarity that the courts need not strain the words of the statute to reach such a conclusion. Cf. Keifer & Keifer v. Reconstruction Finance Corporation, 306 U.S. 381, 392-394, 59 S.Ct. 516, 83 L.Ed. 784.

Applying this test to the facts before us we find that Congress has set up two methods of carrying on such transactions as are here involved: one, by means of a corporation which the Secretary of Agriculture may form to be known as Farmers Home Corporation which is specifically authorized to 'sue and be sued in its corporate name in any court of competent jurisdiction * * *' but is expressly not subject to garnishment. 7 U.S.C.A. § 1014(f)(3). The other is the Farmers Home Administration under which the Secretary is operating here and in the management of which he is empowered to 'compromise or adjust claims and adjust and modify the terms of mortgages, leases, contracts and agreements entered into or administered' under authority of the statute. 7 U.S.C.A. § 1015(g). The Secretary also has authority under the above to '[C]ollect all claims and obligations arising or administered under sections 1001-1005d, 1007, and 1008-1029 of this title, or under any mortgage, lease, contract, or agreement entered into or administered pursuant to said sections and, if in his judgment necessary and advisable, pursue the same to final collection in any court having jurisdiction. All legal work arising out of such claims and obligations, including, but not limited to, the prosecution and defense of all litigation, is authorized to be performed, as determined by the Solicitor of the Department of Agriculture, through the Department of Justice, by attorneys of the Office of the Solicitor of the Department of Agriculture, or by local counsel approved by the Solicitor of the Department of Agriculture * * *.' 7 Tit. U.S.C.A. § 1015(h).

It is significant as bearing on the legislative intent that in the case of the corporation organized under Title 7, § 1014(f)(3) supra, Congress expressly waived governmental immunity subject to certain limitations as previously described. However, in the case of the administrative agency here under consideration no such express waiver appears although it would have been very simple to have inserted it. We do not think it can be implied. Obviously, the Secretary would have to collect mortgage and other debts for which authority is clearly given. Title 7, § 1015(h), supra. It might be equally necessary for him to...