Gherwal v. United States, 6211.
| Decision Date | 09 February 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 6211.,6211. |
| Citation | 46 F.2d 998 |
| Parties | GHERWAL v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
A. L. Wirin and Hiram E. Casey, both of Los Angeles, Cal., and Arthur A. Tarlow, of Portland, Or., for appellant.
George Neuner, U. S. Atty., and J. W. McCulloch, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Portland, Or.
Before RUDKIN and WILBUR, Circuit Judges, and NORCROSS, District Judge.
This is an appeal from an order made and entered on the 23d day of April, 1930, dismissing appellant's bill in equity praying for a decree setting aside a certain other decree entered pro confesso on the 17th day of November, 1924, revoking and canceling an order made on January 19, 1922, granting to appellant a certificate of naturalization.
The motion to dismiss was upon three grounds, and was granted upon the first, reading: "That the United States of America is made party defendant in said suit, and that there is no provision of law allowing or permitting the United States of America to be sued in this cause."
The rule applied by the court below, to the effect that the United States cannot be made a party to any suit, action, or proceeding without express authority of Congress, is well settled and is decisive of this case. United States v. Clarke, 8 Pet. 437, 8 L. Ed. 1001; The Siren, 7 Wall. 152, 19 L. Ed. 129; United States v. McLemore, 45 U. S. (4 How.) 286, 11 L. Ed. 977; Hill v. United States, 50 U. S. (9 How.) 385, 13 L. Ed. 185; Belknap v. Schild, 161 U. S. 10, 16 S. Ct. 443, 40 L. Ed. 599; Kirk v. United States (C. C.) 131 F. 331; Buckley v. United States (D. C.) 196 F. 429.
Order affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weldon v. US
...courts in other circuits have held differently. See, e.g., United States v. Timmons, 672 F.2d 1373 (11th Cir.1982); Gherwal v. United States, 46 F.2d 998 (9th Cir.1931); Jones v. Watts, 142 F.2d 575 (5th Cir.1944); Zegura v. United States, 104 F.2d 34 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 308 U.S. 586,......
-
Zegura v. United States, 9051.
...that a bill of review can be maintained against the United States. In support of its view, the United States cites Gherwal v. United States, 9 Cir., 46 F.2d 998, holding the We think the United States has the right of it. A bill of review, though an original bill in chancery, is ancillary t......
-
United States v. Haas, 1225
...If it were, permission would have to be denied for lack of jurisdiction. Zegura v. United States, 5 Cir., 104 F.2d 34; Gherwal v. United States, 9 Cir., 46 F.2d 998. Defendants are not benefited if the contemplated actions are in the nature of bills of review. Such a bill constitutes new an......