General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. United States, 286 U.S. 49 (1932)

U.S. Supreme Court, (May 02, 1932)

Docket number: 574

/us/286/49/case.html
Permanent Link: http://supreme.vlex.com/vid/general-motors-acceptance-corp-united-20016961
Id. vLex: VLEX-20016961

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Supreme Court - Bennis v. Michigan, 516 U.S. 442 (1996)

U.S. Supreme Court - Bennis v. Michigan, 516 U.S. 442 (1996)

U.S. Supreme Court - Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663 (1974)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Edwin James Doherty v. the United States., 500 F.2d 540 (Fed. Cir. 1974)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - Thomas Taylor, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee., 550 F.2d 983 (4th Cir. 1977)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit - Jeanette Randolph, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Imbs, Inc., Defendant-Appellee. Cheryl Alexander, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. Unlimited Progress Corp., Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. Jennifer J. Cross, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Risk Management Alternatives, Inc., Defendant-Appellee., 368 F.3d 726 (7th Cir. 2004)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - United States of America, Appellee, v. One 1973 Buick Riviera Automobile, Vin 4Y87U3H548756, James T. Logan, Appellant., 560 F.2d 897 (8th Cir. 1977)

Text:

U.S. Supreme Court GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPT. CORP. v. UNITED STATES, 286 U.S. 49 (1932)

[Page 286 U.S. 49, 63]

manufacture, taxation, and traffic in intoxicating liquors and all penalties for their violation in force when the National Prohibition Act was adopted, were continued in force except such provisions as are 'directly in conflict with the provisions of the National Prohibition Act' ( see United States v. Staloff, 260 U.S. 477, 43 S. Ct. 197). The advocates of an implied repeal insist that there is a direct conflict between a statute whereby immunity for innocent lienors or owners is given as of right and a statute whereby immunity is on the footing of an act of grace. To this the retort is made by the opponents of repeal that the spheres of the two immunities are diverse and that the apparent conflict is unreal. Transportation within the United States is the sphere of the one, and importation from without the sphere to the other.

Of the four questions certified, those numbered 2 and 3 are adequately answered when we answer question Number 1.

The answer to question 4 may depend upon circumstances imperfectly disclosed in the certificate, and is not shown to be necessary. White v. Johnson, 282 U.S. 367, 51 S. Ct. 115.

The second, third, and fourth questions are not answered, and the first question is answered, 'No.'

Mr. Justice STONE took no part in the consideration and decision of this case. Footnotes

Footnote 1 'When the commissioner, his assistants, inspectors, or any officer of the law shall discover any person in the act of transporting in violation of the law, intoxicating liquors in any wagon, buggy, automobile, water or aircraft, or other vehicle, it shall be his duty to seize any and all intoxicating liquors found therein being transported contrary to law. Whenever intoxicating liquors transported or possessed illegally shall be seized by an officer he shall take possession of the vehicle and team or automobile, boat, air or water craft, or any other conveyance, and shall arrest any person in charge thereof. Such officer shall at once proceed against the person arrested under the provisions of this chapter in any court having competent jurisdiction; but the said vehicle or conveyance shall be returned to the owner upon execution by him of a good and valid bond, with sufficient sureties, in a sum double the value of the property, which said bond shall be approved by said officer and shall be conditioned to return said property to the custody of said officer on the day of trial to abide the judgment of the court. The court upon conviction of the person so arrested shall order the liquor destroyed, and unless good cause to the contrary is shown by the owner, shall order a sale by public auction of the property seized, and the officer making the sale, after deducting the expenses of keeping the property, the fee for the seizure, and the cost of the sale, shall pay all liens, according to their priorities, which are established, by intervention or otherwise at said hearing or in other proceeding brought for said purpose, as being bona fide and as having been created without the lienor having any notice that the carrying vehicle was being used or was to be used for illegal transportation of liquor, and shall pay the balance of the proceeds into the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts. All liens against property sold under the provisions of this section shall be transferred from the property to the proceeds of the sale of the property . ...'

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access