Document: 386 U.S. 484 87 S.Ct. 1188 18 L.Ed.2d 244 Ayako HONDA et al., Petitioners,v.Ramsey CLARK, Attorney General of the United States. No. 164. Argued Feb. 14, 1967. Decided April 10, Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., Washington, D.C., for petitioners. Richard A. Posner, respondent. Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioners are 4,100 States citizens or residents Japanese descent seeking to recover funds vested under Trading with Enemy Act, 40 Stat. 411, 50 U.S.C. App. § seq. The District Court dismissed their suit against General1 as barred by limitations, and Appeals affirmed a divided vote. 123 U.S.App.D.C. 12, 356 F.2d 351. We granted certiorari because importance unusual character questions involved, affecting proper application this wartime statute. 385 917, 226, 17 142. 2 Both case was treated lower courts it largely argued here, limitations issue has been thought turn on whether Government is estopped from asserting 60-day time bar provided actions kind 34(f) Act. conclude, however, that 'estoppel' not controlling issue, but reasons discussed in period tolled, requiring reversal judgment below. I. 3 Upon outbreak hostilities Japan, States, December 7, 1941, acting seized American assets businesses owned nationals, among such property being Yokohama Specie Bank, Ltd. bank were liquidated, 1943 Alien Property Custodian; see Paramount Pictures, Inc. v. Sparling, 93 Cal.App.2d 768, 770—771, 209 P.2d 968, 969—970. approximately 7,500 depositors holding 'yen certificates,'2 who submitted timely claims, many filed early 1946, 34 Act recovery deposits. 4 Section enacted 1946 legislative response Court's decision Markham Cabell, 326 404, 66 193, 90 L.Ed. 165 which allowed nonenemy creditors former owners bring World War I statute,3 directly out assets. Custodian feared allowance suits might lead inequitable results, brought immediately exhaust at expense other, equally valid, claims. urged, Congress agreed, an approach lines Bankruptcy fairer method distributing assets.4 See H.R.Rep. 2398, 79th Cong., 2d Sess., 14 (1946); S.Rep. 1839, 4, 8 (1946). As bankruptcy law, new required filing debt claim within specified period, 34(b). 5 Approximately yen certificate holders, including petitioners, complied provision photostatic copies respective certificates. In course processing claims pursuant question arose redemption value certificates both Bank those another bank, Sumitomo similar An administrative determination sought proceeding name one depositors, Kunio Abe, Claim 55507. all took view since these deposits had made dollars, allegedly redeemable dollars any upon demand branches they should be dollar debts amount when rate about 4.3 dollar. General,5 characterized debts, following rule Die Deutsche etc. Humphrey, 272 517, 47 166, 71 383, Zimmermann Sutherland, 274 253, 625, 1034, held measure would postwar conversion 361.55 dollar, less than 2% prewar rate. It noteworthy throughout Bank's successor Tokyo, Ltd., willing redeem Petitioners, time, could therefore have received asserted eventually obtained 6 At conclusion process, 1958 1959, Chief Claims wrote each claim, advising 'The Director Office decided November 13, 1957, Matter Abe 55507, Docket 55 D 72, declined review, deposit issued * obligations payable Japan *,' used redeeming Claimants told submit original 45 days. However, letter continued, 'Payment your will immediately.' informed claimant full schedule claimants made, 34(f), after its issuance aggrieved holders file Columbia judicial review. 'Under circumstances,' 'you may wish utilize rather await settlement Office. If done, Notice canceled signing mailing enclosed Cancellation card.' 7 characterize 'confusing' 'insulting.' think opprobrium fastened undeserved consider more accurate say although instructions complex, written manner designed reasonably apprise layman choices before him. particular facts given empirical evidence available, quite understandable initial claimants, only 1,817 responded affirmatively sending certificates, 1,600 immediate Japan. remainder, majority petitioners did nothing. inaction apparent, and, can argued, so Government: indicated despite long 12 years waiting submission supported expect receive basic measured terms, even forthcoming immediately, (an additional interval, turned out, three years) plus possible clearly better off getting repayment itself. This recourse, suggested itself, same understandably advantageous well: obtain relief, foreign source, thus freeing distribution remaining claimants. nothing ascertain why no way letter. 9 affidavits Court, contradicted motion dismiss complaint, various other failure respond. Petitioner Jiro Kai asserted: 10 'I offering me 30¢ my claim. recall asked send registered mail amount. For done cost offered.6 heard others persons mine understood processed together. saw newspaper court believed, therefore, protected.' 11 Other gave reasons. These summarized best affidavit Katsuma Mukaeda, president Chamber Commerce Southern California: 'Many old people read English understand communications Property; them rely themselves able letters; most never talked lawyer cases there general feeling community going alike, claimants; knowledge law Washington believed outcome determine how much money apply just some; experience Evacuation program (50 1981—1987)7 knew generally program, deadlines extended itself changed include originally eligible, eligible some losses due evacuation previously denied payment, later paid; claimants' direct reluctant part evidence, especially theGovernment recognizing face value, accumulated interest over years; moreover, felt taken agreeing accept very small sum want do that; whose originals figure net return amount; individuals, afford hire individual own what end try keep it.' 13 respond 45-day limit, CFR 502.25(g), 21 Fed.Reg. 1582.8 notified disallowed abandoned, further proceedings governed final providing May 1961 prepared sent Petitioners' included schedule, 'Pursuant amended, considering himself Final Schedule may, sixty (60) days date Schedule, complaint review Schedule. *' Such challenge exchange. person challenged ruling cited letters dispositive cases. Kennedy, C.A.No.2529—61, D.D.C., abeyance pending identical raised relation Bank. upheld General's determination, affirmed, Aratani 115 97, 317 161; 323 427. After Aratani, 375 877, 84 147, 110, entered into compromise plaintiffs latter without interest.9 here class represented his framed represent listed outstanding disposition litigation, dismissal asking treatment.10 60 34(f). II. 15 Quite apart governmental estoppel respecting assertion statute contention predicated foregoing train events circumstances, we event tolled during pendency petitioners' right foreclosed. analysis statutory scheme devised persuades us, context factual setting, result consistent purpose 16 system embodied intended provide fair equitable enemy residents. model Federal concept revealed record expressions members principally responsible legislation.11 limitation end—to aid expediting distribution—and primarily shield Government. pattern legislation, presents compelling analogy, pointing make case. 57n, 93(n), requires notification six months first set meeting creditors. Those fail not, lose rights; duly properly paid full, 'claims hereinabove prescribed nevertheless fix cause shown extend if proved, shall surplus case.' true principle specifically authorized 1938 amendment 'designed remedy inequity returning bankrupt creditors, however tardy, satisfied part.' Collier, 57.33, 398. But exercise equity power already reached law. nisi prius stated re Lenox, 92, 1924, 'This (the limitations) benefit bankrupt. present case, provisions with, full. fact remains petitioner reduced judgment, existence validity recognized schedules does now deny, A fund hands trustee.' Id., 93. solution, held, allow though untimely. Williams Rice, Cir., 30 814, estate, presumably assets, reopened discovered. again prove Noting 'is require promptly, order estate closed undue delay,' id., 815, Fifth Circuit absence negligent file, limitation. also Pierson, 174 F. 160, where reopening past Silk, reaching opposite result. 19 Another, precise, analogy area drawn Nassau Smelting & Refining Works Brightwood Bronze Foundry Co., 265 269, 44 506, 68 1013. creditor proved established participate composition bankruptcy. Brandeis, writing unanimous analyzed terms interests involved. From viewpoint he found, 'neither receives, nor receives it, affected others' proof, prove. Nor proof distinguished allowance, legitimate No reason wished participation benefits merely year adjudication. Failure harm Why gain thereby? And penalized total loss claim?' U.S., 272—273, S.Ct., 507. 20 factors applied equal force. What strict serve, except creditors? objecting, none exist: compromised yet account. real fund, neither comes common weal inure Treasury. mere stakeholder, custodian sense word.12 beneficiaries Fund deposited. hardly deemed device augmenting expecially repeated uncontested congressional intent facilitate expand rights having assets.13 III. considerations persuasive delay bringing recalled. known suit, Columbia. outlined history controversy exchange noted '(t)he sole examination readily available lived West Coast, reveals action defined valid practical standpoint, definition, legally excluded differentiation between group material respect. legal dealt rate; apply—at level—to petitioners; named plaintiff claims; suspense then Since interfered speed litigation conducted. 22 arguable difference publication Government's willingness settle dampened larger number costly fund. examination, possibility discounted recalled government funds, debtor distributed war victims barred. enforce primary mandate bona fide due. adequately covers rate, exhausting played 23 served invoking doctrine tolling preserve seek payment basis accorded Abe. IV. 24 light circumstances find arguments unpersuasive. He argues prevent limitations. reach hold litigation. respect, contends is, least formally, sovereign, Banco Mexicano, 263 591, 209, 465, express consent. well settled, course, ordinarily immune define conditions permit actions. E.g., Kendall 107 123, 277, 27 437; Sherwood, 312 584, 61 767, 85 1058. procedural rules statutes waiving immunity strictly, eye effectuating restrictive relinquishes sovereign immunity. supra; Soriano 352 270, 77 306; compare Crown Coat Front Co. 503, 1177, 256. 25 wholly different relies, public treasury affected. Here contemplated finding permanently fisc. House Senate Reports declare, emphasized committee anxious satisfy concur exists strong moral obligation inasmuch as, vesting debtors' property, pursue ordinary remedies debtors.' H.R.Rep.No.2398, 3—4 overall traditional principle, aptly suited nowhere eschewed Congress, action. Burnett New York Central R. 380 424, 1050, 941; cf. Midstate Horticultural Pennsylvania 320 356, 360, 64 128, 130, 88 96. 26 upholding reversed, remanded opinion. ordered. Reversed remanded. 28 CLARK Robert General. Nicholas deB. Katzenbach substituted defendant Ramsey Clark, General, succeeded him respondent operation Sup.Ct.Rule 48(3). expressed yen, bore statement, English: certify _ our Head Office, Yokohama, placed Fixed Deposit —- percent. per annum months, maturing _, subject back hereof. 'Both principal payable, due, aforesaid surrender Certificate, endorsed and/or sealed.' 9(a) U.S.C.App. 9(a). 34(a) limits allowable 'those Philippine Islands; corporations organized laws State, Territory, possession thereof, natural beginning interned paroled Act; acquired Custodian.' assumed duties Executive Order 9788, 11981. Counsel supplied us information range amounts involved litigation: 'Of 1,120 Honda retained (our associated California counsel) date, highest 120,000 yen—about $30,000 ratio (or $332 rate) lowest $12 (about 14¢ rate). Among largest aware chose counsel, 246,000 $60,000) $680 average retainer $2,000 (at rate), mean considerably lower; necessarily modest still, includes 2,980 representation counsel 1948, authorizes awards exceed $100,000 'on ancestry arising reasonable consequence exclusion appropriate military commander Arizona, California, Oregon, Washington; Territory Alaska, Hawaii, authority *.' 70 513, 1981. regulation provides: 'A abandoned request furnished relevant support virtue inquiries regarding appears further.' Neither advanced argument comply independent dismissing suit. suffices open attack recovered exceeded Sumitoma 228 F.Supp. 706, 708. approved settlements March 18, 1964, 1964. 19, writ 9, 1965, 938, 951, 826, stipulation settled. hearings section, dialogue occurred Chairman, Congressman Celler York, Custodian, Markham: 'Mr. MARKHAM. propose man ratable basis, enough everybody, marshaling everybody alike depend brought. 'MR. CELLER. you sure don't get situation fritter away enterprise, give share assets? That done. do.' Hearings Subcommittee Committee Judiciary H.R. 5089, also, 11—13, 113—114. reference introduced bill House: provides takes sells divides proceeds equitably pari passu, bankruptcy.' 92 Cong.Rec. 10217 Under undistributed transferred suffered caused operations 62 1246 1247, §§ 39, 2012. declares returned German 39(a). 976, 80th 1st 2—3 (1947); 2439, Sess. (1948); 1742, (1948). references n. 11, supra. There indicating effect 'remainder beneficiaries' mind imposing procedures 34. 1953 refused enact Government, wiping entirely currency, debts. 616, 83d (1953); 99 7408—7409 (1953).

Category: 0