National Surety Corporation v. United States, 4457.
| Decision Date | 12 June 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 4457.,4457. |
| Citation | 104 F.2d 490 |
| Parties | NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION OF NEW YORK, N. Y., v. UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Braden Vandeventer, of Norfolk, Va. (Vandeventer & Black, of Norfolk, Va., on the brief), for appellant.
Sterling Hutcheson, U. S. Atty., of Richmond, Va., and H. H. Holt, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., of Norfolk, Va., for the United States.
Before PARKER, NORTHCOTT, and SOPER, Circuit Judges.
The United States recovered a judgment against National Surety Corporation for the sum of $2,000 on a bond wherein the master of the Panamanian S/S Mount Ossa, as principal, and the Surety Company, as surety, bound themselves in that sum to secure the payment of all fines that should be found by the Secretary of Labor to be due on account of the action of the master in bringing certain aliens into the port of Norfolk and Newport News. The Surety Company appealed on the ground that no fine had been validly imposed and hence there was no breach of the condition of the bond.
On October 7, 1933 the United States immigrant inspector at Newport News served on the master a notice in writing, addressed to the owner, agent, consignee, master or officer in charge of the ship, directing that two aliens from Greece be detained on board the vessel which was then lying in Hampton Roads. The men escaped the next day.
On October 17, 1933 the inspector of the immigration service in charge at Newport News served on Castner, Curran & Bullitt, Inc., agent of the ship, a notice that the evidence on file with respect to the escaped aliens indicated that a fine should be imposed under section 20(a) of the Immigration Act of May 26, 1924, 43 Stat. 164, 8 U.S.C.A. § 167(a); and that if it desired a hearing as to whether the fine should be imposed, it would be allowed sixty days from the date of the notice for that purpose and the vessel would be allowed to proceed on her outward voyage upon condition that the sum of $2,000 should be deposited as security for the payment of the fine.
On October 18, 1933, the master executed the bond for $2,000, giving his address therein in care of the agent; and the vessel was given her clearance papers. On December 18, 1933, the inspector in charge at Norfolk wrote to the agent of the ship referring to the fine notice of October 16 and requesting that a protest against the fine being made permanent be filed, or that the protest be abandoned promptly.
On December 19, 1933, the attorneys who appear for the appellant in this case wrote to the inspector on behalf of the master and owner of the ship protesting against the levy of the fine on the ground that due precaution had been taken to prevent the escape of the aliens, as shown by supporting affidavits of the master of the ship and a ship chandler in Norfolk.
On March 30, 1934, the Commissioner of Immigration notified the Comptroller General, and on April 2, 1934, notified the Collector of Customs at Norfolk that the fine of $2,000 upon the agent had been finally imposed. On that date demand for payment was made upon the agent.
On May 18, 1934, the same attorneys again wrote to the inspectors in charge at Norfolk that they...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whitaker v. US
... ... Arenetta S. WHITAKER, Appellant, ... UNITED STATES, Appellee ... No. 91-CF-141 ... ...
-
W. Indian Co. v. Root
...and 224; see also United States v. J. H. Winchester & Co., Inc., 2 Cir., 1930, 40 F.2d 472, 473; cf. National Surety Corporation of N. Y. v. United States, 4 Cir., 1939, 104 F.2d 490, 491. The Agent did not deny that it knew about the detention order delivered to Cancryn, its boarding clerk......
- Sprinkle v. Davis, 4453.