Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Whitney Vs. Taylor

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 29, 1895

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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

39 entries 7 linked 32 unlinked
Show
  1. Maddox Vs. Burnham US Supreme Court · Mar 04, 1895
  2. Lansdale Vs. Daniels US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1879
  3. Orchard Vs. Alexander US Supreme Court · Apr 01, 1895
  4. Johnson Vs. Towsley US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1871
  5. Carroll Vs. Safford US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1845
  6. Newhall Vs. Sanger US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1875
  7. Witherspoon Vs. Duncan US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1866
  8. U.S. 85 (1895) U.S. Supreme Court Whitney v. Taylor
    Search
  9. U.S. 85 (1895) Whitney v. Taylor
    Search
  10. not attached were granted, it follows that lands to which such a claim had then attached were not granted. K.P. R. Co. v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  11. company, or was excepted therefrom by reason of the previous declaratory statement of Jones. In Kansas Pacific Railway v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  12. the question as to whether the land passed to the railroad company or not, and, distinguishing Water & Mining Company v. Bugbey
    Search
  13. In Hastings & Dakota Railroad v. Whitney
    Search
  14. In Witherspoon v. Duncan
    Search
  15. Wall. 210, this Court decided, in accordance with the decision in Carroll v. Safford
    Search
  16. The same doctrine was applied in Bardon v. Northern
    Search
  17. had been made and the final receipt issued prior to the filing of the map of definite location. See also Newhall v. Sanger
    Search
  18. to any such controversy. The land, being subject to such claim, was, as said by Mr. Justice Miller in Railway Company v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  19. local land office, is the official recognition of the preemption claim. While the cases of Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  20. and Hastings & Dakota Railroad Co. v. Whitney
    Search
  21. to support taxation, and one of which he cannot be dispossessed except by some legal proceedings. Witherspoon v. Duncan
    Search
  22. claim which excepts a tract from the scope of a railroad grant like this. See, among other cases, Malone v. Railway
    Search
  23. Millican v. Railroad
    Search
  24. Payne v. Railroad
    Search
  25. Railroad Company v. Lewis
    Search
  26. Railroad Company v. Stovenour
    Search
  27. in a homestead case and its entry on the land books. The latter, as we have seen in the two cases of Railroad Company v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  28. and Railroad Company v. Whitney
    Search
  29. But it was held in Johnson v. Towsley
    Search
  30. Lansdale v. Daniels
    Search
  31. U.S. Supreme Court Whitney v. Taylor
    Search
  32. K.P. R. Co. v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  33. of Jones. In Kansas Pacific Railway v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  34. Water & Mining Company v. Bugbey
    Search
  35. Bardon v. Northern
    Search
  36. Railway Company v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  37. of Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. Dunmeyer
    Search
  38. Malone v. Railway
    Search
  39. of Railroad Company v. Dunmeyer
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial