Document: 329 U.S. 654 67 S.Ct. 601 91 L.Ed. 577 UNITED STATESv.N.Y. RAYON IMPORTING CO., Inc. (No. 2), et al. N.Y. 2) v. STATES. Nos. 94 and 96. Argued Jan. 8, 1947. Decided Feb. 3, Mr.Joseph M. Proskauer, of New York City, for Rayon Importing co. Mr. Samuel D. Slade, Washington, D.C., the United States. Justice MURPHY delivered opinion Court. 1 This case involves another impact § 177(a) Judicial Code1 on power Court Claims to award interest i a judgment against 2 The Co., Inc., (Rayon #1) Nyrayco & Converting Corporation (Nyrayco) were engaged in importation rayon yarn. Between 1925 1929 they paid customs duties such importations which claimed erroneous. Prior March 1, 1930, filed protests with Collector Customs accordance applicable Tariff Act, 19 U.S.C.A. 1001 seq., provisions, resulted institution actions States 3 On #2) was incorporated purpose acquiring all assets assuming liabilities #1, two other corporations business. As part this reorganization, #1 dissolved as Secretary State issuing certificate dissolution that date. 4 #2 voluntarily January 9, 1931, law. December 16, 1935, by proclamation nonpayment franchise taxes. 5 In 1937, long after these three dissolved, rendered decisions sustaining had connection yarn imported between 1929. A reliquidation entries directed. reliquidation, ascertained refund $362,482.71 payable $30,809.75 Nyrayco. Checks those drawn, but since been caused checks be transmitted General Accounting Office 'for lawful disposition.' Representatives thereafter requested deliver them; request denied Comptroller deposited proceeds Treasury trust fund entitled 'Outstanding Liabilities 1938', pursuant law.2 6 Several unsuccessful attempts made representives obtain money fund. First, consent decree entered declaratory proceeding Supreme adjudicating that, among corporations, owner refunds or thereof.3 But refused make payment when confronted decree. Thereafter, February 26, 1943, attorneys suggested released #2, each corporation being represented its director directors trustees liquidation. rejected proposal stated would permitted only upon final court competent jurisdiction concluding issue ownership. He suit brought Claims. 7 liquidating then Claims, claiming continued exist collecting distributing it funds issue. also suits Claims; amounts their respective alleged ownership remained them. After consideration claims,4 held he rights taken over trustees, who thus recover 64 F.Supp. 684. judgment, however, awarded 6% total fund, run from April 19, 1941, date an amendment Tax Law retroactively clarified capacity sue involuntarily corporations.5 8 We issued writ certiorari No. 94, petition States, review action awarding interest. At same time, we certiorari, 699, 43, 96 cross-petition urging should have allowed time issuance 1937 1938 rather than 1941. 9 our opinion, Code prohibits any under circumstances case. Section provides 'No shall claim up rendition unless contract expressly stipulating interest, * *.' recently pointed out Thayer-West Point Hotel 585, 398, provision codifies traditional rule regarding immunity liability unpaid accounts claims. words, absence constitutional requirements, can recovered if express recovery has given Congress. And Congress indicated take forms: (1) specific statute; (2) stipulation duly into agents Thus there no implication use ambiguous language. Nor intent framers statute permit suffice where is not translated affirmative statutory contractual terms. necessary waive must express, strictly construed. Tillson 100 25 543; supra. 10 Tested standards, cannot sustained. There obviously involved. appropriation statutes cover here contain whatever Act May 14, 50 Stat. 137, 142; June 25, 1938, 52 1114, 1149. codified 177(a), accordingly applies. 11 Cla ms (64 684, 687), without making reference sought justify what thought 'would right just.' It felt officials delayed too determining claims at very least, could earlier necessary. Inasmuch known Court's did belong Government, believed fair true owners get defects uncertainties removed maintain sued.6 12 equities situation favor claims, thereby acquire carve implied exception plain words 177(a). Had desired situations just equitable, so provided. conclusive evidence lacks nature. Indeed, conclusion supply give imposition 13 By token, assume unreasonably determination funds, inaction operate settled officers possess through confer some Carr 98 433, 209; Stanley Schwalby, 162 255, 16 754, 40 960; Minnesota 305 382, 59 292, 83 235; Shaw, 309 495, 60 659, 84 888. applies here. Only steps Cf. Smyth 302 329, 353, 58 248, 252, 82 294, 114 A.L.R. 807. 14 seek avoid effect original previously reduced judgment. proceeding, said, based pre-existing judgments Court, precluding application do pause inquire nature entertain judgments. enough note embodied complete one covering types including arising seen, grounded contract. follows relating traced language statute. itself warrants exception. 31 U.S.C. 226, 226. 15 connection, point 1875, amended 1933.7 Th t directs withhold creditor indebted turn until indebtedness satisfied. cause Government's cross debt denies indebtedness. permits period withholding Government fails win substantiate asserted set-off. limited extent marks set forth See, example, American Potash Co. 717, 80 Ct.Cl. 160; Stewart 71 126. inapplicability facts once apparent. relates solely asserts set-off creditor. No asserted; nothing more ascertainment fact, real instant fitted within terms 1875. merely argument policy providing results erroneous belief existence cross-indebtedness equal force attempt determine claim. waived arguments Courts lack basis think sound policy. reiterate Such absent instance. 17 reverse includes becomes unnecessary consider merits cross-clai s, dismissed. 18 So ordered. Reversed part; 28 284(a), 284(a). 21 1934, c. 756, 48 1235, 725t, 725t. non-adversary affected Nyrayco, hand, other. provided protection possible claimants later impleaded cited action. See footnote 4. consolidated. cases, Societe Pour Nouveaux Placements de Capitaux plaintiff. disclaimer dismissed 'all interest' had. persons companies named having none them intervening petitions; Governor approved 203-a Law, Conso.Laws, 60, removing question whether taxes suits. relevance, 105 Stock Consol.Laws, 59. Their collect never questioned. relevance #1. 5. proper relation objection Nyrayco's several years name drawn Government. 481, 1933, 212, Title II, 13, 47 1516, 227, 227. provides: 'When legal authority presented payment, plaintiff therein manner, principal surety, duty amount due States; assents set-off, discharged his thereof said debt, execute discharge refuses further will sufficient charges costs prosecuting already suit, proceedings immediately commenced enforce same, prosecuted reasonable dispatch. less withheld before provided, balance per centum thereon plaintiff.'

Category: 7