46 C.F.R. § 327.7
Administrative disallowance presumption
If MARAD fails to give written notice of allowance or disallowance of a claim in accordance with § 327.6 within sixty calendar days following the date of the receipt of such claim by the proper person designated in § 327.5, such claim will be presumed to have been “administratively disallowed,” within the meaning in section 1(a) of 50 U.S.C.A. 4701 (a).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: Rashidi v. Am. President Lines, 96 F.3d 124 (5th Cir. 1996).
Rashidi v. Am. President Lines, 96 F.3d 124 (5th Cir. 1996). “Under 46 C.F.R. § 327.7 , a claim, upon the expiration of sixty days, is deemed disallowed in the absence of a response, and the complainant may then proceed to file an action in district court.”
Juan Morales v. United States, 38 F.3d 659 (2d Cir. 1994). “46 C.F.R. § 327.7 . In the present case, Morales’s attorney, some 23 days prior to the expiration of the limitations period, sent MARAD a claim whose contents were not in compliance with the applicable regulations.”
Morales v. United States, 866 F. Supp. 84 (E.D.N.Y 1993). “As the government points out, 46 C.F.R. § 327.7 already provides a presumption of disallowance after 60 days from the date of filing the claim.”
Hausner (D. Maryland 2025). “,” 46 C.F.R. § 327.7 . In this case, only the first avenue to exhaustion is possible because Ms.”
Hebert v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 137 (E.D. Tex. 1994). “Absent written notice of disallowance, a plaintiff must show that his claim was presumptively disallowed under 46 C.F.R. § 327.7 . 46 C.F.R. § 327.6 . Presumptive disallowance occurs when the plaintiff receives no written notice within sixty days.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.