Plettenberg, Holthaus & Co. v. I.J. Kalmon & Co.

• Decision Date: 21 May 1917
• Citation: 241 F. 605
• Parties: PLETTENBERG, HOLTHAUS & CO. v. I. J. KALMON & CO. et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia

241 F. 605

PLETTENBERG, HOLTHAUS & CO. v. I. J. KALMON & CO. et al.

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Western Division.

May 21, 1917

Hardeman Jones, Park & Johnston, of Macon, Ga., for plaintiffs.

John B Harris and Andrew W. Lane, both of Macon, Ga., for defendants.

SPEER District Judge.

The plea here interposed is that the plaintiffs are subjects of the imperial government of Germany, and, for the reason that they are now alien enemies, their action against citizens of the United States cannot be maintained. The facts set up being admitted, the defendants, for the reasons stated, ask that the case be dismissed.

The plaintiffs, German subjects, had long been engaged in this country and Germany as cotton merchants. They had extensive dealings with American merchants and with the defendants, and have sued to recover from the latter a balance of $18,902.85 besides interest, and other sums alleged to be owing to them. They brought their action, and it was pending, before the President proclaimed that the German government was at war with the United States. The plaintiffs reside in Germany.

It is true that there are strong legal inhibitions against the commencement or maintenance during the war of a suit or action by an alien enemy. The controlling reason of this is that, if the alien enemy prevails and obtains judgment, it will obviously add the sum he recovers to the resources of the power of which he is a subject, then hostile to the country whose court he seeks.

Here, for instance. the large values the plaintiffs might recover from Americans would serve to enhance the strength of an alien and inimical power. The inhibition is, however, coextensive only with the war. It does not abate an action or suit begun while the courts are open to aliens. Here the organic law extends the judicial power to controversies between aliens and citizens of the United States. The action, instituted before hostilities began, was properly brought. It may be maintained, but to the extent only that it does not contribute strength to enemies of our country.

The only case in conflict with this view, cited by the learned counsel for the defendant, is Howes, Hyatt & Co. v Chester & Co., 33 Ga.page 89. There a suit, begun by a resident of New York before hostilities between the United States and the Confederate States, was by the Supreme Court of Georgia ordered to be dismissed. Since, however, it turned out in the end that no alien...