Summary

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed Kaufman v. Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles et Commerciales…

As the opinion does not indicate whether the alleged nonenemy stockholder must bear the burden of proving his character, we assume that this burden rests on the claimant stockholder in an enemy-tainted corporation. Even so, the difficulty of rebutting an individual's self-serving evidence as to his neutrality is obvious. The war and prewar activities and connections of the many American and neutral residents, stockholders of neutral corporations engaged in world-wide dealings, are known largely only to the interested individual.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed Kaufman v. Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles et Commerciales…

Where the corporation subjects its assets to forfeiture by aiding our enemies, the corporation should pay the penalty. The friendly stockholder should not be permitted by strained statutory interpretation to withdraw his contribution to the funds that were used to our injury and so reduce the assets available for war claimants. We see no real difference, as to liability to have assets vested under the Trading with the Enemy Act, between a corporation enemy-dominated as this is alleged to be and an enemy-domiciled corporation producing munitions of war for use against the United States.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature