Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Paraiso v. United States

• 1907 • 207 U.S. 368 • Fuller Court
In the 1907 case of Paraiso v. United States, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving property rights in Panama following the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty between America and Panama. The treaty gave control over certain lands to America for constructing, maintaining, and protecting a canal across the Isthmus of Panama. A Panamanian citizen named Paraiso claimed that he owned part of this land before it was taken by American authorities without compensation or due process. He sued for...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Fuller Court
Term: 1907
Docket: 23
207 U.S. 368
28 S. Ct. 127
52 L. Ed. 249
1907 U.S. LEXIS 1230

Paraiso v. United States

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1907 case of Paraiso v. United States, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving property rights in Panama following the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty between America and Panama. The treaty gave control over certain lands to America for constructing, maintaining, and protecting a canal across the Isthmus of Panama. A Panamanian citizen named Paraiso claimed that he owned part of this land before it was taken by American authorities without compensation or due process. He sued for damages under an act allowing suits against the U.S government in federal courts. The court held that while sovereign immunity generally prevents lawsuits against governments without their consent, Congress had waived this protection through legislation permitting such claims relating to property seized during military operations abroad. However, they also found that since Paraiso's claim arose from actions taken under international law (the treaty), rather than domestic law (U.S constitution), his lawsuit could not proceed as it fell outside jurisdictional limits set by Congress' waiver of sovereign immunity.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Paraiso v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and principles of international law. He contended that under these laws, a nation has exclusive jurisdiction over its own territory and cannot be subjected to another country's legal system without consent. In this case, he believed Panama had not given such consent to allow U.S courts to exercise authority over crimes committed within its borders by non-U.S citizens against other non-U.S citizens. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority’s ruling which upheld U.S jurisdiction in Panama based on an 1846 treaty between Colombia (which then included Panama) and the United States granting transit rights across Isthmus of Panama but did not explicitly grant judicial powers or sovereignty to America. Harlan also pointed out inconsistencies in applying this interpretation only after Panamanian independence from Colombia rather than immediately after signing of said treaty.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Dec 16, 1907
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms