- 26 -
1971). Consequently, the situation before us is one of first
impression, and we are free to adopt our own interpretation of the
rule in United States v. Summerlin, supra.
In United States v. Summerlin, supra, the Supreme Court
addressed a claim of the United States against an estate in
Florida. (A county judge in Florida denied the Government's
petition to allow the claim, which arose under a Federal statute,
determining that the claim was "void" because it was not filed
within 8 months from the time of the first publication of the
notice to creditors as required by Florida law.) The Supreme
Court, in holding that the United States was not bound by State
statutes of limitations (or subject to the defense of laches) in
enforcing its rights, stated that "When the United States becomes
entitled to a claim, acting in its governmental capacity and
asserts its claim in that right, it cannot be deemed to have
abdicated its governmental authority so as to become subject to a
state statute putting a time limit upon enforcement." Id. at 417.
The Court then recognized that the Florida statute was not even
considered a statute of limitations, but was referred to as a
statute of "non-claim".12 Regardless, the Court rejected the notion
12 The Court concluded that this interpretation was drawn
from language in the statute which provided that a claim not
filed within the specified period "'shall be void even though the
personal representative has recognized such claim or demand by
paying a portion thereof or interest thereon or otherwise.'"
United States v. Summerlin, supra at 417.
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011