Summary

Robert H. Jackson Orvis v. Brownell — Opinion of the Court

This suit, under § 9 (a) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, [1] asks a decree that petitioners have an interest in vested property of Japanese nationals in the hands of the Alien Property Custodian, that he holds the property subject to petitioners' attachment lien and must satisfy their judgment. The controlling facts are not in controversy. The Japanese nationals involved were indebted to petitioners, while a third party, Anderson, Clayton & Co., was indebted to those Japanese.
Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson Orvis v. Brownell — Opinion of the Court

We hold that the freezing order did have such an effect and that, while it recognized attachment liens insofar as they determined relationships between creditor and enemy debtor, it did not permit the transfer of a property interest in the blocked funds which could be asserted against the Custodian.
The order forbids 'transfers of credit' and 'transfers of any evidences of indebtedness or evidences of ownership of property,' and General Ruling No. 12 [5] specifies that this prohibition extends to the creation of a lien.
Source: Wikisource

Robert H. Jackson Orvis v. Brownell — Opinion of the Court

Notes
↑ 50 U.S.C.App. § 9 (a) , 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 9 (a) : 'Any person not an enemy or ally of enemy claiming any interest, right, or title in any money or other property which may have been conveyed, transferred, assigned, delivered, or paid to the Alien Property Custodian or seized by him hereunder and held by him or by the Treasurer of the United States * * * may file with the said custodian a notice of his claim under oath and in such form and containing such particulars as the said custodian shall require
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature