|
|
Ex Parte Republic of Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (1943)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Ex Parte Republic of Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (1943)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 318 U.S. 523, click here.
Ex parte Republic of Peru No. 13, original Argued March l, 1943 Decided April 5, 1943 318 U.S. 578
ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF
PROHIBITION AND/OR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Syllabus
1. This Court has power, under 28 U.S.C. §§ 342, 377, to issue a writ of prohibition or mandamus to restrain the district court from exercise of further jurisdiction in rem, in an admiralty suit, although the case be one in which direct appellate jurisdiction is vested in the circuit court of appeals, this Court having ultimate discretionary jurisdiction by certiorari; but such power will be exercised only where the question is of public importance or is of such nature that the exercise of such power is peculiarly appropriate. Ex parte United States, 287 U.S. 241. Pp. 582, 586.
2. A case of that character is presented by the claim of a friendly foreign state that its vessel, seized by the district court under a libel in rem in a private litigation, should be released as immune from suit, which claim of immunity had been recognized by the Department of State, whose action has been certified to the district court. P. 586.
3. In a suit in rem in admiralty by a private libelant for breach of a charter party, the district court acquired jurisdiction in rem by seizure and control of a vessel owned by the Republic of Peru. The Republic moved for release of the vessel upon the ground of sovereign immunity from suit and there was presented to the court by the Attorney General a certification showing that such immunity had been recognized and allowed by the State Department. Held: that it was the duty of the court to surrender the vessel and remit the libelant to the relief obtainable by diplomatic negotiation. P. 587.
4. The Republic of Peru did not waive its claim of immunity by urging it both before the Department of State and the court or by reserving the right to interpose other defense. P. 589.
Leave to file granted.
On motion for leave to file a petition for a writ of prohibition and/or mandamus to prohibit the district court from further exercise of jurisdiction over a proceeding in rem in which a vessel was seized, and to direct the district judge to enter an order declaring the vessel immune.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Ex Parte Republic of Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (1943) in 318 U.S. 578 318 U.S. 579. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=ETCXICSYKG7ZTLQ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Ex Parte Republic of Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (1943), in 318 U.S. 578, page 318 U.S. 579. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=ETCXICSYKG7ZTLQ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Ex Parte Republic of Peru, 318 U.S. 578 (1943). cited in 1943, 318 U.S. 578, pp.318 U.S. 579. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=ETCXICSYKG7ZTLQ.
|