72 CLAIM OX' JAMES Y. ZORIKI

Transcription

1 72 CLAIM OX' JAMES Y. ZORIKI lno DecitlecL October 10' NNDINGS OF FACYT This claim, in &mount $1,193, was received by Attorney General on March L,1949. The claim involves personal property loss two distinct kinds, namely, loss irom forced sale household furniture and or items personalty, including an automobile, and loss from ft stored goods' Except for automobile, all items involved represented community property claimant and his wife, Helen Hatsue Zotiki. In case automobile, legal title was in claimant but actual ownership was in his bror, Mike M. Zoriki, claimant executing contract purchase in his bror's behalf because latter was a minor. Ciaimant, his wife, and bror were all born in United States Japanese parents and have at no time since December 7,1941, gone to Japan. On Decembet 7, L941, all three resided at LL37 South Irolo Avenue, Los Angeles, California, and y were living at 2001 South Purdue Avenue, West Los Angeles, when evacuated on April 28, 1942, under military orders pursuant to Executive Order No. 9066, to Manzanar Relocation Center, Manzanar, California. At time y were evacuated, parties were unable to take property involved with m to relocation center and shortly before ir evacuation, refore, claimant sold household furniture toger with or basic cornmunity personalty, and also automobile, for highest and best prices he could obtain. In addition, claimant packed miscellaneous small community items still remaining, i. e., silverware, dishes, electric toaster, blankets, etc., securely in a trunk which

2 he stored in home a fello mor and several ott rrr t *Jtffiil;.;tilH?rIr[Aff 73 While claimanr was in th";;;;;oo housing..nt.", goodswas structure r";;;;;;;d rein property stoten. stored ljaimalt h;; ";;. or its recovered contents' at trunk ti*" J"i"t""!sold and community automobile personalty irrurr.a, condition re prevailed wherein-thuru *ul;';;;;" a ctaimant market could upon have which dispo;"j;iii" value. The property oroo.rry at its fair would ""i-fr"r* but for been evacualt sold or stored r rh;;;"r* selling and and claimant,s storing, performed acts without avaitability knowledge C;.r;;;;;*rroru*. reasonable - facitities, in circumstan..r. were able ifru" value fri;;;;#;:, community prop".ty and sold thar storedwas $66g.54!!U:ZU, _.r**?rotal this g?44.2g. amount, claimant.ec"iuedii2 Of sold, leaving for a total items.o**u"iiyj.r."", he and reasonable $b1g.2g. value. The fair "f tfr","i"*"uile sale was g645. at time Claimant-rei.ir.i"wroo its vehicle, from which u*ou"t sale fr"iu"?.d real party ".,r"" to his in interest, bror, who was unmarried. n still a At minor tim"^$ and,1. *ru,,hur" $40 due was on a balance car. The foss irjm its sale, refore, was g30b. The losses involved frr""" ""t been comnen_ sated for by insurance or orwir" urrd no separate ciaim has been made by claimanr;, #;;t"ornu". REASONS F'OR DECISION The evidence loss with property involved respecto community consists suppor.uiirurrtl ted by,*orn fo ur testimonv s tatemen ts i" having ;;iti" g, knowledge r*; fil;;#r, claimantis ty' "*r.rifrio a third from anoth". proper_ b.o" Iypurchased o"f'"iji#unt one who tl".tri;;i;#. assertedgift for i"r"rred ctaimanr as "nd a weddine his;if;;#; fellow-evacuee fourth in whose from home tfre ir"i and its contents

3 74 were stored. The evidence loss with respect to automobile consists claimant's sworn testimony, supported by written statements from Mike \{' Zoriki, Lquitable oluner. The investigat"ron has revealed nothing contradictory se materials and y accordingly stand unrebutted. A valuation trunk and its con' tents as time storage in amount $75'75 is reasonable. Since claimant acted reasonably in storing this property and would not have done so but for his evacuation, loss from its ft is allowable' Aktko Yagi, ante, p. 11. A valuation community per-.ottutty which claimant sold in amount $668'54 as time sale is also reasonable. Claimant received $225 as proceeds from sale this property, leavin-g an.rnjo*p"rr.ated balance $ Inasmuch as claim' ant had. no free market and acted reasonably in selling in circumstances, this loss is likewise allowabtre' Toshi, Shimomaye, ante, p. L. Adding two sums involved, i. e., ff75.75lost in consequence ft and fi ost on sale, total allowable com' munity loss is $ With respect to automobile, re is presented for original determination question proper party claim; uni itr a situation involving equitable as well as legal ownership property. The record discloses that claim' ant executed contract for purchase automobile and took title reto. It furr reveals, how' ever, that he did so solely for purpose making possible extension credit to his bror, Mike M' Ziki, who was n a minor, and that latter advanced all monies paid on car and was its actual owler' Since Mike M. Zonki was thus real party in interest, it is clear that loss from saie vehicle should properly have been claimed for by said Mike M' Zoriki. The record contains statements from both claim' ant and beneficial owner, however, explaining why latter did not make separate claim, and setting forth reasons for inclusion automobile by claim'

4 75 ant in his claim. From this material it appears Mike M. thar Zoriki was desirous maiirrg claim in behalf his but owrr parties u.r,r-udih*t sirr.e tfre registered car had been in claimant,s name a"d latter, holder,,. had sold G;fi* vehicle, "iri*l"t perforce sole party was eligible to make claim fo, it. ior. i.o*;a*;i;. In consequence this fact, Mik; M. Zorikinecessarilv retied on ctaimant to make ciaim fjil;, ;i;i"r;;il;":l ing to turn over to him arry morri". utio*.a for loss. - That parties should fruou u.r,r*ed that alone claimant was eligible to claim ana thai Mike M. Zoriki sequently con- should have made no claim in his though o*" U.frJt desirous doing.o, i.,ujily understandable. Not only r,vasuch an assumption natural in stances, circum_ but no regulations had been issued proper ;;fi"t;;t; party claimant under Act, and tou* vided p?ol claimants for making claim was devoid instruc_ tions indicating that where both iegal and ownership equitable were involved equitabie "*".r;;;;;;; party in interest, should claim. thi* buirrg th.;"*, since provisdons ;; Section 2 (; Statute Mike M. bar Zoriki, equitabte ownea fro* _utolrr;}j; at present time, ii is clear that'failuru to,.logni^ claim as presented wourd nu u"ju.t and defeasive statutory purposes. ft is true, ff.orr.., that cent in re_ times tendency lujiciary, in exercise its rule ma-king power, has been to require prosecution actions in "utg o,f real lhe party irr'l.rt"ri*t.- for Cil; example, Rule LZ (a) ira"rot Rules Procedure Ciuil contains a specific provision to this effect. 2g Y. s. -c., following. S 7zs 1cj. rt is obvio,r*, no*u,rji that reason primarily -""q..1,rt;* require;;;;; namely, avoidance multiplicity Jf actions, lr", relevancy ;; here. Moreov_er, if i..ig"incant to note that requirement is usually u..";;-;;;d by certain ceptions ex_ w'jh respect to persons having legal title and 1^.glTol law righ.t _action (Cf. Chew v. Brumagen, 80 U. S. 492), and that Rute tz ia) ot it e f,.a.rut n,rf.", _56_7

5 76 refore, specifically exempts refrom certain designated fiduciaries. 28 U. S' C', lupra" Included among se is &,,trustee an express trust" who, rule pro- ;i;;;,;;y sue in his own ttu** without joining with lim tfre partf for whose benefit action is brought' Ibid' Thai claimant falls within this category is clear ftg1 llu tu"t* i""ved and from examination applicable authorities. See e. g., Chewv, Brumagell' s,il,pra' and P. N. Crag A Co. v. Ciu'atliotis, 276 Fed" 565' ;-cf' Huite, v. Robbi'ns, 117 Fed' g2o, g2l-923, and see also' Scott On Trusts, Vol. 3, $ 462'1' Furrmore, it must be remembered that rule making authority vested in Attorney General under a."t i. extremely broad, Section 6 (h) statute empowering him to prescribe such rules and regulations as L" -uy l"** proper in carrying out statutory provisions. In view intent and purposes.act it is manifest that any rules or regulations presoibed reunder w-ould necessarily provide for liberal procedure and recognize persons as prop'er parties wherever possible in order to assure total achievement statuffi ui-.. A forti'ori, refore, such a policy must be prlrur.d in situations resulting from absence any rules and regulations. Finally, it should be noted that record, contains a statement from claimant to effect that any monies awarded for loss from sale automobilewillbeturnedoverbyhimtohis bror in accordance with ir understanding at ii*e making claim, and also a statement from Mike NI' Zorlki verifying original understanding and consenting to and approving such payment in his behalf' In tigit se facts ancl several considerations addiced above, loss having been occasioned by evacuation equitable owner and latter being juris- Jictionally eligib1e, and parties having acted reasoluntyir,u.rrr*ir'gthatholderlegaltitiewaslhe sole eligibte party claimant, it is proper to allow loss from sale automobile as part instant

6 77 claim. Such allowance is, course, upon expressly receipt contingenr by- ir"la.r moneys or irre legal allowed for ti,e loss in u.trt. and for ti* u""q11 rhe,uur pu"tytill ix::'#l capacity gi:filltli -"rlit H',""H if trjl,ll"-ffi :r sa,e in $800 *u.'"u.uiu"d "r*;j; illl'ffih,::r,#:i:l tion, re musr be a.ju-.t"jiiu,t"rnu" -;;; which was stil due amount on $40 car. This leaves Hirata, an uncompensated ante, p.82. balance facts found, $B0b i* which,,ri"*uilr"- ";;i;i*^*re, on beneficial o*1ur, Mik" s.rpre,. M. ;;;;;,';;":, The evacu ation rh e ttss, o cc ute d, i, j ;; d;;;:ffi,?. :fj,il,lt;.c.]aim under Act but has nj;;# 'h:ht1-ji,.lflny":lil?1 ii?,::'lffi ti"; purposes purchase-and tff.utu r.::ht#"; unj-rrx,t ffiifiil:hny?*," th; #;r.v in interest, ro,,, r,om ;i; #;? lf::."ilil" ffit errv i n cr u d " ir, ".ilibt In light tp::*-?iq, receive tfr"",-.iri*ant sum is gsfg.z6'f;;;h;;, entirled to Iosses inuoru.j, t"osutr,u, *i;h th.,;;t#:t1lltfi.jf to be received bv n]*,lt t"rriu* loss io"'huu on automobile, M. Zoriki ";;;t*l for above-mentioned oi grrn.rnunder Actas.o_purruiioi rhe property foo as to*, a reasonspl: personal evacuation himseli 3nd- outu"ui-.onsequence lris wife,-;;; M. Zoriki. iis fnsar-as bror, Mike it relates this io-community claim includes au estate. interesi;;; riiarital communitv :l lt subject property,ir.u no.tui*l,nt,s separate wife claim. has although madl erigibre-lo Act. Tolcutaro do so Hata, under ante, p.21.