Court Opinion

ID: 9420664
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 22:55:36.779881+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:26.507969
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Reed,
with whom Mr. Justice Minton joins, concurring.
We concur in the result and in the opinion except as to its declaration that petitioners will be able to recoup just compensation from the United States should they suffer a judgment effecting a second recovery against them. ■ •
In our view there is- no present taking of the property of Cities 'Service, but only of the money due from Cities Service to the foreign bondholder on maturity of the obligation. Standard Oil Co. v. New Jersey, 341 U. S. 428. It may be that if Cities Service is later required to pay a claimant other than the Alien Property Custodian, it will have a claim against the United States for satisfaction of its expenditure. Determination that the United States owes, such an obligation should await development óf the circumstances of a second judgment. Direction Der Disconto-Gesellschaft v. U. S. Steel Corp., 300 F. 741., 743; 267 U. S. 22, 29.