THE BRIGANTINE AMIABLE LUCY

v.

THE UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• State of Wash. v. United States, 214 F.2d 33 (9th Cir. 1954)
  …nvolves many situations : (a) Tlxe later repeal or expiration of a Statute; Berry v. Davis, 1917, 242 U.S. 468, 37 S.Ct. 208, 61 L.Ed. 441 (repeal); Yeaton v. U. S., 1809, 5 Cranch 283, 3 L.Ed. 101 (repeal); The Rachel v. U. S., 1810, 6 Cranch 329, 3 L.Ed. 239 (expiration). (b) The later enactment of a Statute or negotiation of a treaty; Crozier v. Fried Krupp Aktiengesellsehaft, 1912, 224 U.S. 290, 32 S.Ct. 488, 56 L.Ed. 771 (Statute); U. S. v. The Peggy, 3801, 1 Cranch 103, 2 L.Ed. 49 (Treaty); Carpent…
• Patrocinia L. Vda De Rodulfa v. United States & Adm'r of Veterans Affairs, 461 F.2d 1240 (D.C. Cir. 1972)
  …U.S. (7 Wall.) 506, 19 L.Ed. 264 (1869); Insurance Co. v. Ritchie, 72 U.S. (5 Wall.) 541, 18 L.Ed. 540 (1867); United States v. Preston, 28 U.S. (3 Pet.) 57, 66, 7 L.Ed. 601 (1830). See also Schooner Rachel v. United States, 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 329, 3 L.Ed. 239 (1810) (expiration of law conferring jurisdiction); Yeaton v. United States, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 281, 3 L.Ed. 101 (1809) (same). . Supra note 20. . See note 14, supra, and accompanying text. . 74 App.D.C. at 215-210, 122 F. 2d at 208-209. . Id. at…
• Mut. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Lipp, 28 F.2d 863 (9th Cir. 1928)
  …gue, 194 U. S. 147 [24 S. Ct. 611, 48 L. Ed. 913]; Dinsmore v. Southern Express Co., 183 U. S. 115, 120 [22 S. Ct. 45, 46 L. Ed. 111]; Mills v. Green, 159 U. S. 651 [16 S. Ct. 132, 40 L. Ed. 293]; The Schooner Rachel v. United States, 6 Cranch, 329 [3 L. Ed. 239] ; United States v. The Schooner Peggy, 1 Cranch, 103, 109, 110 [2 L. Ed. 49].” Appellee’s chief reliance is on Deposit Bank v. Board of Councilmen, 191 U. S. 499, 24 S. Ct. 154, 48 L. Ed. 276, but we do not think that decision is necessarily incon…