From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Baldridge

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Opelousas Division
Jul 9, 1929
35 F.2d 264 (W.D. La. 1929)

Opinion

No. 5306.

July 9, 1929.

Philip H. Mecom, U.S. Atty., and Frank O. Chavez, Asst. U.S. Atty., both of Shreveport, La.

John W. Lewis, of Opelousas, La., for defendants.


At Law. Action by the United States against Lawrence Baldridge and another. Submitted on question relative to costs occasioned by reason of abandonment of forfeiture proceeding. Decree for plaintiff.


The above-numbered cause has been submitted upon the question of whether or not certain costs, consisting mainly of storage charges upon an automobile seized by the Prohibition Department, should be paid by the government, for the reason that the criminal prosecution and the forfeiture proceedings were subsequently abandoned and dismissed by the District Attorney. While it seems unjust that the owner of a car under such circumstances should be subjected to the loss caused by the accrual of storage charges in a prosecution which has been discontinued, yet I am aware of no law permitting the assessment of costs as such against the government in a case of this kind. However, the Prohibition Department should take the question up and have the defendants reimbursed, if it can be legally done.

For the reasons assigned, I am constrained to hold that costs cannot be awarded the defendant. Proper decree may be presented.


Summaries of

United States v. Baldridge

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Opelousas Division
Jul 9, 1929
35 F.2d 264 (W.D. La. 1929)
Case details for

United States v. Baldridge

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES v. BALDRIDGE et al

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Opelousas Division

Date published: Jul 9, 1929

Citations

35 F.2d 264 (W.D. La. 1929)

Citing Cases

United States v. Schultze

But that objection is * * * overruled in Shevlin-Carpenter Company v. Minnesota, 218 U.S. 57, 69, 70, 30…