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.

Campbell Vs. Weyerhaeuser

Campbell vs Weyerhaeuser

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Feb-20-1911
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/91129

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
219 U.S. 424
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Campbell

Respondent

Weyerhaeuser

Excerpt

campbell v. weyerhaeuser - 219 u.s. 424 (1911) u.s. supreme court campbell v. weyerhaeuser, 219 u.s. 424 (1911) campbell v. weyerhaeuser no. 12 argued april 27, 28, 1910 restored to docket for reargument december 19, 1910 reargued january 19, 20, 1911 decided february 20, 1911 219 u.s. 424 appeal from the circuit court of appeals for the eighth circuit syllabus decided on authority of weyerhaeuser v. hoyt, ante, p. 219 u. s. 380 . the facts are stated in the opinion. page 219 u. s. 425 mr. chief justice white delivered the opinion of the court. this case and the hoyt case, just decided, are of the same general character, and were consolidated and tried below as one case. in this case, however, the application of campbell to purchase the tract by him claimed was rejected by the land department, and campbell was not permitted to enter the land. the land furnishing the selection basis also lay further west in minnesota than the lost tract in the hoyt case. the court of appeals held that campbell acquired no equitable interest in the land by his application and the denial thereof, and consequently he could not maintain a bill in equity to charge the title under the patent issued to the railroad company upon a selection of a tract as lieu land, and affirmed the decree of the circuit court, dismissing the bill. as, in any event, the decision rendered in the hoyt case is decisive of this, we hold that the bill was rightly dismissed, and the decree of the circuit court of appeals is therefore affirmed. mr. justice harlan and mr. justice day dissent for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion in case of weyerhaeuser v. hoyt, ante, p. 219 u. s. 380 .

Full Judgment

Campbell v. Weyerhaeuser - 219 U.S. 424 (1911)
U.S. Supreme Court Campbell v. Weyerhaeuser, 219 U.S. 424 (1911)

Campbell v. Weyerhaeuser

No. 12

Argued April 27, 28, 1910

Restored to docket for reargument December 19, 1910

Reargued January 19, 20, 1911

Decided February 20, 1911

219 U.S. 424

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

SYLLABUS

Decided on authority of Weyerhaeuser v. Hoyt, ante, p. 219 U. S. 380 .

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 219 U. S. 425

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case and the Hoyt case, just decided, are of the same general character, and were consolidated and tried below as one case. In this case, however, the application of Campbell to purchase the tract by him claimed was rejected by the Land Department, and Campbell was not permitted to enter the land. The land furnishing the selection basis also lay further west in Minnesota than the lost tract in the Hoyt case. The court of appeals held that Campbell acquired no equitable interest in the land by his application and the denial thereof, and consequently he could not maintain a bill in equity to charge the title under the patent issued to the railroad company upon a selection of a tract as lieu land, and affirmed the decree of the circuit court, dismissing the bill. As, in any event, the decision rendered in the Hoyt case is decisive of this, we hold that the bill was rightly dismissed, and the decree of the circuit court of appeals is therefore

Affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE DAY dissent for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion in case of Weyerhaeuser v. Hoyt, ante, p. 219 U. S. 380 .

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial