Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 3/22/1869

Confiscation Cases

Citations

  • 74 U.S. 454
  • 19 L. Ed. 196
  • 7 Wall. 454
  • 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1021

Syllabus

<p>X. An informer, in prosecutions under the act of August Cth, 1861, widen subjects to confiscation, upon libel filed, property whose owner used or consented to its use in aiding the rebellion, lias no vested interest in the subject-matter of the suits; and this, notwithstanding that the act declares that whore any person lijes an information with the Attorney of the United States (as the act allows any person to do), the proceedings shall bo “ for the use of such informer and the United States in equal parts.”</p> <p>2. Hence, the Attorney-.General may properly, and against the interest and objection of the informer, ask a dismissal of an appeal to this court in cases where the decree below, having been against it, the government has appealed; and in the same way ask, upon agreement to that effect with the counsel of the claimants, for a reversal of a decree, where, on decree against them, the appeal has been by the other side, and for a remand of the cause to the court below, with directions to it to dismiss the libel.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a qui tam “informer” had no vested interest in the suit that would prevent the attorney general from dismissing the suit
  • recognizing the “[s]ettled rule” that no actions could proceed for the “benefit” of the federal government except at the behest and under the direction of the government
  • noting that a private individual “cannot compel a criminal investigation”
  • explaining the prosecution could enter a nolle prosequi “at any time” before the jury was empaneled
  • “Public prosecutions, until they come before the court to which they are returnable; are within the exclusive discretion of the district attorney”
  • Secretary of Treasury can “remit a forfeiture or penalty, accruing under [statutes], subsequent to the final decree or judgment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Clifford

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

188 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.