Rubens v. Robertson

Citations

• 38 F. 86
• 1889 U.S. App. LEXIS 2791

Syllabus

<p>1. Office and Officer-t-Revlew of Conduct. Where a statute confers discretion on a public officer, which is exercised by him in good faith, the courts cannot review his action, though based on false reports made by negligent subordinates.</p> <p>2. Custom Duties — Collector—Liability. The collector of customs is not responsible in damages for negligent acts on the part of his subordinates, in the absence of proof that such subordinates were known by him to be careless or incompetent, or were selected by him without proper care. Following MoberUon v. Sichel, 127 U. S. 007, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1286.</p> <p>3. Same — Trover—Case. A collector of customs who sells unclaimed goods in pursuance of section 2976 of the Revised Statutes, in the belief that they are deteriorating in value, is not liable in trover, or in an action on the case for negligence, even though it appears that there was no substantial deterioration, if he acted in good faith, and was not personally guilty of negligence.</p> <p>4. Same. Where a statute authorizes the collector of the port to sell goods “upon due notice, ” and the clerk whose duty it was to give such notice failed to put up any notice whatever, the collector could not beheld liable for his negligence in that regard, in the absence of proof of negligence on his part in tie selection of the particular individual who was assigned to that duty.</p> <p>5. Same. ■ The collector of the port cannot be charged with negligence in delegating to the appraiser the duty of examiningmerchandise, and reporting whether it is deteriorating in value within the meaning of section 2976 of the Revised Statutes.</p>