Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2

TOPIC: Act of State

TITLE: Underhill v. Hernandez


168 U.S. 250 November 29, 1897
PLAINTIFF: George Underhill
DEFENDANT: General José Manuel "Mocho" Hernández
PONENTE:

FACTS:
In 1892, George Underhill, a U.Scitizen, built a water system for and supplied water to the City
of Bolivar, Venezuela, pursuant to a contract signed with the government. Gen. Hernandez orga-
nized a coup and overthrew the government. The United States soon recognized Hernandez’s
faction as the rightful government of Venezuela. After Hernandez overtook the City of Bolivar,
Underhill applied to Hernandez for a passport to leave the country. Hernandez initially denied
the request. Several days later, Hernandez granted the request, and Underhill returned to the US.
Underhill sued Hernandez in US courts, alleging an illegal detention.

The lower courts rules that there was no case, that the acts of the defendant were the acts of the
government of Venezuela, and as such are not properly the subject of adjudication in the courts
of another government

ISSUE:
WoN the court erred in their judgement that defendant’s act were that of the State

RULING:
No. The acts complained of were the acts of a military commander representing the authority of
the revolutionary party as a government, which afterwards succeeded, and was recognized by the
United States.

In this case the archives of the state department show that civil war was flagrant in Venezuela
from the spring of 1892, that the revolution was successful, and that the revolutionary govern-
ment was recognized by the United States as the government of the country; it being, to use
the language of the secretary of state in a communication to our minister to Venezuela, 'accepted
by the people, in the possession of the power of the nation, and fully established.

DOCTRINE:
Act of State - According the Chief Justice Fuller:
Every sovereign state is bound to respect the independence of every other sovereign state,
and the courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of an-
other, done within its own territory. Redress of grievances by reason of such acts must be
obtained through the means open to be availed of by sovereign powers as between them-
selves.

You might also like