r60

CLAIM OF GEORGE SIIIINO

tNo. 146-35-?26. Decicled January 23, 19b11

T.INDINGS OF T'ACT

1. This claim, in the amount of $1,025, was receivedby the Attorney General on February 2L, L949. Claim-ant was a florist. This claim involves losses of householdfurnishings and an ice box, desk and light fixtures used inclaimant's florist shop, automobile, florist supplies, and aneon sign. Claimant has never been married at any time.Claimant was the owner of the automobiie and the floristshop. The claimant was born in Los Angeles, California,on September 7,1914, of Japanese parents. At no timesince December 7,1941, has claimant gone to Japan. OnDecember 7,lg4l, and for some time prior thereto, he re-sided at L1331/z West Washington Street, Los Angeles,California, from which address he was evacuated May 1,1942, under military orders pursuant to Executive OrderNo. 9066, dated February L9, 1942, and sent to the Gra-nada Relocation Center, Amache, Colorado.

2. Clairnant was unable to take the above-mentionedproperty with him when he was evacuated. In AprilL942, immediately prior to his evacuation, claimant soldthe ice box, desk, and fluorescent light fixtures used in hisflorist shop for 925. The articles had a reasonable valueat that time of $65. White on leave from the relocationcenter, at Kansas City, claimant arranged for the sale ofhis automobile and sold it in 1943 for $850. The reason-able value of his car at that time was 91,300. At the timeof claimant's evacuation, no free market existed on whichhe could have disposed of his property al a reasonableprice and he acted reasonably in the circumstances.

3. With the permission ofthe florist shop stood, claimaplies and neon sign in the galhis return he recovered then

4. His loss on sale of theand on the car $450, none oby insurance or otherwise.

R.EASONS F

Ciaimant was eligible to tOn the facts found in Pa

property sold was allowableAs to the household furnitutbought by his fa.ther and "t

over the shop" (Affidavit, trever appears of its value, thit was sold save "bY variostrangers when theY were(Affidavit, p. 5). No loss cbe allowed.

The neon sign, florist su1are not allowable. The nclaimant's father (Affidavjthat the florist shop was tthis father and "from that tin my name and owned bYthings on claimant's admisand sold after his return frwas then selling in a freecompulsion of evacuation,sequently any loss sustainea ttnaturalt' consequence olante, p. 68 ; Shuzo Kumanc

RGE SHITNO

ed January 23, 1gbll

)F racl

nt of gl,02b, was received'ebruary 21, lg4g. Claim-rvolves losses of householdk and light fixtures used inbile, florist supplies, and abeen married at any time.automobile and the floristin Los Angeles, California,nese parents. At no timeimant gone to Japan. Onr time prior thereto, he re-Jton Street, I,os Angeles,he was evacuated May 1,'suant to Executive Order942, and sent to the Gra-Le, Colorado.ake the above-mentionedras evacuated. In Aprillvacuation, claimant soldb light fixtures used in hisls had a reasonable valueleave from the relocationb arranged for the sale oft3 for 9850. The reason-was $1,300. At the timemarket existed on whichlroperty at a reasonablethe circumstances.

161

3. With the permission of the owner of the lot on whichthe florist shop stood, claimant stored the florist shop sup-plies and neon sign in the garage at the rear of the loi. Onhis return he recovered them and sold them.

4. IIis loss on sale of the florist shop fixtures was $40and on the car MbO, none of which was compensated forby insurance or otherwise.

RE.A.SONS FOR DECISION

Claimant was eligible to claim and was unmarried.On the facts found in paragraph 2, the loss on certain

property sold was allowable, Toshi Sh,i,momaye, ante,p. L.As to the household furniture, claimant stated that it wasbought by his fa.ther and ,,turned over to me when I tookover the shop" (Affidavit, p. b), but no evidence whatso_ever appears of its value, the price that it brought, or howit was sold save "by various members of the family tostrangers when they were in the neighborhood in 1g42,,(Affidavit, p. 5). No loss on it can in these circumsancesbe allowed.

The neon sign, florist supplies, baskets, jars, and vasesare not allowable. The neon sign was also bought byclaimant's father (Affidavit, p. 4), but claimant statesthat the florist shop was turned over to him in 1g3g bvhis father and "from that time on * * * it was operateiin my name and owned by me,, (Affidavit, p. g). Thesethings on claimant's admission, however, were all storedand sold after his return from the relocation center. IIewas then selling in a free market and unaffected by thecompulsion of evacuation, actual or impending, and con_sequently any loss sustained on sale cannot be said to bea "natural" consequence of his evacuation. Seiji Bando,ante, p. 68 ; Shuzo Kumano, ante, p. l4g.