Memorandum — Dawson County v. Hagen

—

Inthe Supreme Gourt of the Winited States

OcToBER TERM, 1949

No. 507

Dawson County, Montana, AND Prarrie County,

MONTANA, PETITIONERS

;

Mary Hacen, E. B. Cuark, MINNIE R. EVANS,

Unitep States or America, Epna YALE, ALLEN

W. Yate, Rusy Yate, RutH Perrerson, Hans

PETTERSON, AND ScorrisH AMERICAN MorTGAGE

ComMPANy, LIMITED

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED

STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MEMORANDUM FOR THE UNITED STATES

The petition for a writ of certiorari seeks to re-

view a decision of the United States Court of Ap-

peals for the Ninth Circuit (Dawson County, Mon-

tana, et al., v. Hagen, et al., 177 F. 2d 186; R. 181-

182). It is the purpose of this memorandum to

state the position of the United States with respect

to this litigation.

In condemnation proceedings brought by the

United States, the amount representing just com-

pensation for the property had been paid into court

(R. 90), and $3,642.92 had been distributed to Daw-

son and Prairie Counties, Montana (R. 98-99). The

(1)

a

2

trial court having concluded that this distribution

was erroneous, entered judgment against the United

States in favor of Mary Hagen, et al., the defendant

bondholders of the Upper Glendive-Fallon Irriga-

tion District, for $3,642.92, and a judgment in favor

of the United States against Dawson and Prairie

Counties, Montana, for the same amount (R. 155-

156). Upon appeal by the United States (R. 173)

the court of appeals recognized the Government

was not responsible for errors in distribution of the

amount representing just compensation for the land

condemned, and hence its judgment modified that

of the district court to eliminate any requirement

that the United States pay any sum in addition to

the amount previously awarded (R. 182-183). Peti-

tioners are not assigning this phase of the decision

of the court of appeals as error. Their petition

relates to the distribution of funds paid by the

United States as just compensation, no claim being

made that the amount owing by the United States

is more than the sum that has been paid into court.

Since the United States is not concerned with

proceedings for distribution (United States v. Dun-

nington, 146 U.S. 338, 352), it has no interest in

the present petition. Accordingly, it neither joins

in nor opposes the petition for writ of certiorari.

Respectfully submitted,

Puiuie B. PERLMAN,

JANUARY, 1950. Solicitor General.

W v. s. Government PRINTING OFFICE: 1950 870479 423

PORES MT NEALE PD TIL LI RT AE RM RET ERR NONIG I SE: NS INAS EG SELLER IIL SN LOE MES SHON A