TRUSTEES OF THE PURITAN CHURCH, APPELLANTS
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 2410 does not waive sovereign immunity for suits seeking to recover property already seized by the United States, only for quiet title actions.
Appellants sought the return of realty seized and sold by the United States to satisfy tax liens, and damages for wrongful detention. The District Cou…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Damages For Wrongful Detention cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The District Court dismissed the complaint which sought first the return of realty seized and sold on execution by the United States in satisfaction of certain tax liens, and second, damages1 ***for the wrongful detention of the property.
The District Court held that the suit for recovery of the realty was an unconsented suit against the United States and hence the court was without jurisdiction. The court then went on to pass on the merits of the claim assuming, arguendo, that it had jurisdiction, and held that the sale of the realty in partial satisfaction of appellants’ transferee tax liability was valid.2 Title 28 U.S.C. § 2410 upon which appellants rely waives the sovereign immunity of the United States to suits to quiet title to real property on which the United States has a lien or a mortgage. The suit is not a suit to quiet title, but to recover property the title to which is in the United States, a form of action as to which 28 U.S.C. § 2410 does not waive sovereign immunity. See Sissman v. Chicago Title & Trust Co., 1941, 375 Ill. 514, 32 N.E. 2d 132. Appellant relies on 28 U.S.C. § 2463 but that statute applies only to personal property.
Affirmed.
. Appellant appears to have abandoned this claim on appeal since it is not mentioned in the Questions Presented or in points in the brief.
. See Kennedy v. Puritan Church, decided Nov. 13, 1958 (2 A.F.T.R.2d 6260); Puritan Church Building Fund v. United States, 1958, 103 U.S.App.D.C. 174, 256 F. 2d 888, certiorari denied, 1959, 358 U.S. 927. 79 S.Ct. 313. 3 F.Ed.2d 301.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Magenau v. Aetna Freight Lines, Inc., 358 U.S. 927 (U.S. 1959)
- Gardner v. United States, 358 U.S. 927 (U.S. 1959)
- In re Williams, 256 F.2d 888 (D.C. Cir. 1958)
- Puritan Church Bldg. Fund v. United States, 256 F.2d 888 (D.C. Cir. 1958)