Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-05-12
D. c. HEADS ADOPT
CLAIMS POLICY ON
COUNSEL RULINGS
Commissioners IL Questions
Are Answered in Writing,
Giving Outline.
INTEREST PAYMENTS
BARRED IN DECISION
District May Consent to Judgments
Being Entered Against It,
Attorney Holds.

The District Commissioners yesterday
approved number of policies to be fol-
lowed in settling claims against the
District in amounts under $4,000, I'M
Ger authority granted them by a law
passed at the last session of Congress.
Many claims for refunds, principally
from those who say they have been i'm
properly assessed under the Borland
law, have been waiting settlement in
the corporation counsels Office until
an outline of general policies could be
drawn up and approved by the city
heads.
Twelve questions were asked by the
Commissioners of the corporation
counsel and legal opinions were sub
mitted on all questions by a round
table conference attended by all mem
bers of the corporation counsels legal
staff. The answers then were given the
Commissioners in writing and the city
heads yesterday, after some revision,
adopted the answers as standing policies.
Questions and Answers Given.
Among the rules laid down was a de-
cision that the District may not pay
interest on any claims against it un-
der the law; that the defense of govern
mental function and other proper de-
lenses are not permitted to be waived
under the law, and that the District
viii not be prohibited, under the law,
from consenting to judgments being
entered against it in court.
The questions and the answers fol-
low:
/. Does the law give the Comission-
ers any power or authority for the set
tlement upon a compromise basis OF
claims by the District of Columbia
against any person?
Answer: No. -
2. Are all settlements of future
claims against the District necessarily
to be made under the provisions Of this
law, including a report to Congress
thereon?
Congress ShoaId Get Report.
Answer: The question is not free
administration, however, I believe it
well to report ali such settlements to
8. viii the existence of the new law
prevent the District from hereafter con-
senting judgment against 1t. and II 1t
does not, will cases where judgments
have been rendered by consent have to-
be reported to Congress under this
law?
Answer: No. All such consent judg-
nents must be reported to CONGRESS.
4 Does the law permit the DlsCrlct
of Columbia to waive defense OF gov
ernmental functions?"
Answer: No. The act in no way
takes any legal defense from the Dis
trict Of Columbia.
S. Does this law permit the District
of Columbia to waive the defense OF
voluntary payment?
Answer: Yes.
6. Does the question of whether or
not the payments of taxes was mace
under protest bear on the right OF the
district to make refunds under TINS
law?
Answer: No.
= In the case of banks, for instance,
where payments of taxes nave peen
made for several years under pro1esI,
if the annual amounts claimed are
iass than S5 600. but aggregate more
than IS. 900, can they be treated as sep
srste claims and settlement made I'M
Answer. While the act limits settle
,,,aots IN S5. 900. there is nothing therein
contained which takes from the COM
n1issiouers the right, as administrative
oficers, to report to Congress. accom-
nanied by a recommendation, meEl-
forious claim in excess OF So,OOV.
Minor settlements Permitted.
TT settlements are made under this
Law can anv payments be made except
after presentation of reports thereon 70
Congress and specific approprla1iOh
therefor? 80
Answer: No. except in the case OF a g
minor claim, which may De pau oo' "a
current appropriations.
Is a distinction to be made as 10
nsvnents made within period OF tnree
wears between those made under proCeSI
ard those not made under protest?
10 Does this law supersede the act
IF the legislative assembly OF the de
trict of Columbia, approved January 10,
1872, by the provisions OF winch na rne
Commissioners are authorized 70 cause
ali taxes enormously paid to the DIS
trict of Columbia to be refunded?
Answer: No. A.
II If. in an equity proceeding, the
court directs cancellation OF an assess
rnent. the amount of the assessment al
ready having been paid to the DlsIrlct'
should the refunds be mace IN acco I!1-
arce with this law, or should the paftleS
in interest be required to take Juog-
n1ents against the District and certl1y
them to Congress for approprlatlon'
rather than as settlements unoer tnls
law? ,,o,,
as outlined in the question. II the as
sessment had been levied ana not palo'
. the procedure would be in equity TO
cancel. If the assessment had been
levied and paid. the procedure would
be in law to recover. &c..
-. Can the Commissioners exercise
their discretion in accepting decision OF
the Supreme Court OF the DISTRICT OF
Columbia as final, or are they unoer
anv obligation to take every case to the
Court of Appeals of the District of CO.
lunnbia?
Answer: The acceptance of any de-
cision of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict is purely discretionary with the
District Commissioners in the settlement
= aIaiv, or slIif under the act