Skip to main content

B-118944, OCT. 3, 1955

B-118944 Oct 03, 1955
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

TO THE NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 23. YOU PRESENT NO NEW EVIDENCE IN YOUR LETTER BUT ADHERE TO YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU ARE AN INNOCENT HOLDER FOR VALUE WITH FULL RIGHTS TO RECOVER. - WAS GUILTY OF AN ATTEMPT TO VIOLATE THE PHILIPPINE EXCHANGE CONTROL LAWS CONSTITUTING A CRIME AND THAT FOR THAT REASON SHOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE PROCEEDS OF THE CHECK. THE QUESTION WHETHER YOU ARE A HOLDER IN DUE COURSE OF THE CHECK APPEARS TO BE OPEN TO SUFFICIENT DOUBT AS NOT TO REQUIRE OR JUSTIFY THIS OFFICE IN ATTEMPTING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE SUCH A HOLDER. IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT ARE NOT REQUIRED OR AUTHORIZED TO CERTIFY FOR PAYMENT CLAIMS OF DOUBTFUL VALIDITY.

View Decision

B-118944, OCT. 3, 1955

TO THE NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 23, IN REPLY TO OURS OF JULY 21, 1955, RELATIVE TO YOUR CLAIM FOR A PORTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF UNITED STATES TREASURY CHECK NO. 13,566,001, DATED SEPTEMBER 7, 1951, FOR $1,801 DRAWN TO THE ORDER OF CATHERINE BOBADILLA DEL ROSARIO BY PAUL D. BANNING, SYMBOL 300.

YOU PRESENT NO NEW EVIDENCE IN YOUR LETTER BUT ADHERE TO YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU ARE AN INNOCENT HOLDER FOR VALUE WITH FULL RIGHTS TO RECOVER. YOU ALSO CONTEND THAT MR. CLAIBORNE--- APPARENTLY IN ENDORSING THE CHECK FOR DEPOSIT IN THE SEATTLE BRANCH OF THE BANK OF CALIFORNIA--- WAS GUILTY OF AN ATTEMPT TO VIOLATE THE PHILIPPINE EXCHANGE CONTROL LAWS CONSTITUTING A CRIME AND THAT FOR THAT REASON SHOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE PROCEEDS OF THE CHECK.

THE QUESTION WHETHER YOU ARE A HOLDER IN DUE COURSE OF THE CHECK APPEARS TO BE OPEN TO SUFFICIENT DOUBT AS NOT TO REQUIRE OR JUSTIFY THIS OFFICE IN ATTEMPTING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE SUCH A HOLDER. IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT ARE NOT REQUIRED OR AUTHORIZED TO CERTIFY FOR PAYMENT CLAIMS OF DOUBTFUL VALIDITY. SEE LONGWILL V. THE UNITED STATES; 17 C.CLS. 288; CHARLES V. THE UNITED STATES, 19 ID. 316; 18 COMP. GEN. 199; 26 ID. 778. NOR IS IT APPARENT HOW, IF MR. CLAIBORNE WAS GUILTY OF A VIOLATION OF THE EXCHANGE CONTROL LAWS, AS YOU CONTEND, SUCH A FACT WOULD IN ANY WISE ESTABLISH OR AID IN ESTABLISHING THAT YOU ARE A BONA FIDE HOLDER.

THE RECORD FURTHER SHOWS THAT THE CHECK WAS CASHED BY YOU FOR MR. LLAVE IN PHILIPPINE PESOS AT THE RATE OF 200.375 PESOS FOR EVERY $100, OR 3608.75 PESOS, AND THAT MR. LLAVE SUBSEQUENTLY REIMBURSED YOU TO THE EXTENT OF THE 2450 PESOS.

ACCORDINGLY, THE CLAIM OF MR. CLAIBORNE WILL BE ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT THAT MR. LLAVE REIMBURSED YOU ON THE CHECK, AND NO FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THIS OFFICE WITH RESPECT TO THE BALANCE OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVED IN THE ABSENCE OF A JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF THE RIGHTS OF YOU AND MR. CLAIBORNE, OR A WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND HIM AS TO THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE BALANCE, ACCOMPANIED BY A RELEASE IN THE MATTER.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs