## Facts

- A California resident, Alvina Wagner, died in 1942 owning real and personal property in California.
- Her 1941 will left her entire estate to four relatives who were German nationals and residents of Germany.
- California heirs-at-law petitioned in the probate proceeding to exclude the German legatees under California law restricting alien succession.
- In 1943, the Alien Property Custodian vested in himself the German legatees’ interests in the estate under federal wartime authority.
- The Custodian (later succeeded by the Attorney General) sued in federal court against the executor and the California heirs seeking a declaration that the Custodian was entitled to the net estate.
- The dispute centered on whether the 1923 U.S.–Germany treaty governed succession rights and displaced California Probate Code § 259, which conditioned nonresident aliens’ inheritance of personal property on reciprocal rights for U.S. citizens abroad.

## Issues

1. Whether Article IV of the 1923 U.S.–Germany treaty governing inheritance of real property by German heirs preempted conflicting California restrictions, and whether the treaty provisions survived wartime events and later federal enactments.
2. Whether the treaty’s clause concerning German nationals’ power to dispose of personal property applied to an American decedent’s bequest of U.S. personalty to German nationals.
3. Whether California Probate Code § 259’s reciprocity condition on nonresident aliens taking personal property was unconstitutional as an intrusion into federal foreign-affairs authority.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Ninth Circuit.
- The Court held that, as to real property, Article IV remained effective and prevailed over conflicting California law restricting German heirs’ ability to inherit realty.
- The Court held the treaty’s personal-property clause did not cover an American citizen’s bequest of U.S. personalty to German nationals; it addressed disposition of personalty by a German national.
- The Court upheld California Probate Code § 259 as applied to personal property, concluding it did not unconstitutionally invade the federal foreign-affairs domain.
- The Court recognized that federal wartime vesting authority could operate even where treaty-based inheritance rights in realty survived.

## Legal Principles

- A treaty provision applicable to inheritance can preempt contrary state inheritance restrictions.
- War does not necessarily suspend or abrogate treaty provisions; treaty rights may persist absent clear termination by the political branches or superseding law.
- Treaty language on “power to dispose” of personal property may be limited to disposition by the foreign national owner, not succession to personalty owned by an American decedent.
- In the absence of controlling federal law, a state may regulate succession to local personal property, including imposing reciprocity conditions on nonresident aliens, without automatically violating federal foreign-affairs authority.
- Federal authority to vest enemy property may coexist with treaty-recognized rights, subject to congressional control of ultimate disposition.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the 1923 treaty protected German heirs’ right to inherit California real estate notwithstanding conflicting state restrictions, but it did not protect German nationals’ receipt of an American decedent’s California personal property; California’s reciprocity statute could govern personalty, while federal wartime vesting powers remained available.


Clark v. Allen, 331 U.S. 503 (1947)