Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Garfield Vs. Allison

Garfield vs Allison

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Nov-30-1908
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/90415

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
211 U.S. 264
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Garfield

Respondent

Allison

Excerpt

garfield v. allison - 211 u.s. 264 (1908) u.s. supreme court garfield v. allison, 211 u.s. 264 (1908) garfield v. allison nos. 249, 250 argued october 15, 18, 1908 decided november 30, 1908 211 u.s. 264 error to the court of appeals of the district of columbia syllabus decided on the authority of garfield v. goldsby, ante, p. 211 u. s. 249 . the facts are practically the same as those stated in the opinion of the preceding case. page 211 u. s. 265 mr. justice day delivered the opinion of the court. these cases were argued and submitted with the goldsby case, no. 248, just decided. in the case of george a. allison, a patent had been issued for his lands and duly recorded. in the case of ida allison, an allotment certificate had been issued. the relators are cherokees, but the legislation herein involved is not different from that governing allotments to members of the chickasaw nation. the allisons made application to the commission for admission to citizenship under the act of june 10, 1896, 29 stat. 321, c. 398. their applications were denied, and no appeal taken. afterwards, a decision by the commission granting the application of the allisons for enrollment as citizens by blood was affirmed by the department of the interior as of april 16, 1904. their names were summarily stricken from the rolls by the department's order of march 4, 1907. the cases are controlled by the decision in goldsby's case. judgments affirmed.

Full Judgment

Garfield v. Allison - 211 U.S. 264 (1908)
U.S. Supreme Court Garfield v. Allison, 211 U.S. 264 (1908)

Garfield v. Allison

Nos. 249, 250

Argued October 15, 18, 1908

Decided November 30, 1908

211 U.S. 264

ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SYLLABUS

Decided on the authority of Garfield v. Goldsby, ante, p. 211 U. S. 249 .

The facts are practically the same as those stated in the opinion of the preceding case.

Page 211 U. S. 265

MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion of the Court.

These cases were argued and submitted with the Goldsby case, No. 248, just decided. In the case of George A. Allison, a patent had been issued for his lands and duly recorded. In the case of Ida Allison, an allotment certificate had been issued.

The relators are Cherokees, but the legislation herein involved is not different from that governing allotments to members of the Chickasaw Nation.

The Allisons made application to the commission for admission to citizenship under the Act of June 10, 1896, 29 Stat. 321, c. 398. Their applications were denied, and no appeal taken. Afterwards, a decision by the commission granting the application of the Allisons for enrollment as citizens by blood was affirmed by the Department of the Interior as of April 16, 1904. Their names were summarily stricken from the rolls by the Department's order of March 4, 1907. The cases are controlled by the decision in Goldsby's case.

Judgments affirmed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial