Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Whitney Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 15, 1901

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

37 entries 3 linked 34 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Elder US Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1900
  2. United States Vs. Peralta US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1856
  3. United States Vs. Cambuston US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1857
  4. Whitney v. United
    Search
  5. States - 181 U.S. 104 (1901) U.S. Supreme Court Whitney v. United
    Search
  6. States, 181 U.S. 104 (1901) Whitney v. United
    Search
  7. had acquired all that the law of 1824 permitted him to take, and the subsequent grant was not valid. United States v. Hartnell
    Search
  8. to establish a Mexican grant if there is nothing in the public records to show that it ever existed. Peralta v. United
    Search
  9. in that, any record of further proceedings to obtain the approval of the supreme government. In United States v. Teschmaker
    Search
  10. In Berreyesa v. United
    Search
  11. United States v. Ortiz
    Search
  12. admitted in this particular case. That it is not a sufficient excuse has been decided by this Court. United States v. Castro
    Search
  13. law and the regulations above mentioned were all that were in force in Mexico after their dates. United States v. Cambuston
    Search
  14. was urged by way of argument by counsel, and referred to by Mr. Justice Lamar in his opinion in Interstate Land Co. v. Maxwell
    Search
  15. Land Grant Co., 139 U. S. 569 , 139 U. S. 578 . Again, in United States v. Coe
    Search
  16. Florida cases, herein referred to. We think no such presumption ought to obtain in this case. In United States v. Cambuston
    Search
  17. between the cases involving Spanish titles in the Territories of Louisiana and Florida, such as United States v. Arredondo
    Search
  18. Delassus v. United
    Search
  19. examined by the Court of Private Land Claims and by this Court is clearly recognized and enforced in United States v. Ortiz
    Search
  20. must prove his title by a preponderance of evidence, and no presumption of authority existed. And in Hayes v. United
    Search
  21. the supreme executive for making such a grant. If that were shown, we might say, following the case of United States v. Castillero
    Search
  22. the grant was a valid one, and ought to have been confirmed by the court below, and within the case of United States v. Osio
    Search
  23. U.S. Supreme Court Whitney v. United
    Search
  24. United States v. Hartnell
    Search
  25. Peralta v. United
    Search
  26. In United States v. Teschmaker
    Search
  27. Court. United States v. Castro
    Search
  28. Interstate Land Co. v. Maxwell
    Search
  29. In United States v. Cambuston
    Search
  30. Hayes v. United
    Search
  31. of United States v. Castillero
    Search
  32. of United States v. Osio
    Search
  33. United States v. Vallejo
    Search
  34. United States v. Vigil
    Search
  35. United States v. Ortiz
    Search
  36. United States v. Coe
    Search
  37. United States v. Arredondo
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial