# Memorandum — Dawson County v. Hagen

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386416_2503%3A3

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Memorandum
- **Published:** January 1, 1950
- **Citation:** 338 U.S. 949

## Text

—

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386416_2503%3A3. Public record. Not legal advice.