Citation network
Heckman Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 01, 1912
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
-
Heckman v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 224 U.S. 413 (1912) U.S. Supreme Court Heckman v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 224 U.S. 413 (1912) Heckman v. UnitedSearch
-
Congress has power to extend the restrictions upon alienation of allotted lands by allottee Indians, Tiger v. WesternSearch
-
an allottee Indian is not inconsistent with retaining control over his disposition of lands allotted to him. Tiger v. WesternSearch
-
the jurisdiction of a court of equity, and a pecuniary interest in the controversy is not essential. United States v. AmericanSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the government to sue to maintain the statutory restrictions upon alienation of Indian allottee lands. Minnesota v. HitchcockSearch
-
Cherokee Nation. Demurrer to the bill was sustained by the circuit court, and the bill was dismissed. United States v. AllenSearch
-
The power of Congress thus to extend the restriction upon alienation was sustained by this Court in Tiger v. PageSearch
-
of the United States to the Cherokees have repeatedly been described in the decisions of this Court. Cherokee Nation v. GeorgiaSearch
-
United States v. RogersSearch
-
Cherokee Nation v. SouthernSearch
-
United States v. OldSearch
-
Stephens v. CherokeeSearch
-
No. 377, 53d Cong., 2d Sess.), a portion of which is quoted in the statement of facts made by the Court in Stephens v. CherokeeSearch
-
with the retention of control over the disposition of the allotted lands was expressly decided in the case of Tiger v. WesternSearch
-
of its courts. It was not essential that it should have a pecuniary interest in the controversy. In United States v. AmericanSearch
-
of certain patents, this Court, in commenting upon the statements which had been made in the case of United States v. SanSearch
-
repelled by the language just cited, and by the fact that, in more than one of the cases, notably in United States v. HughesSearch
-
In United States v. RickertSearch
-
Sloan v. UnitedSearch
-
Commenting upon this, the Court said, in McKay v. KalytonSearch
-
United States to the subject matter and of the nature of the question to be determined, cannot be doubted. Minnesota v. HitchcockSearch
-
such a relation to the controversy that final decree cannot be made without affecting their interest. Shields v. BarrowSearch
-
but the Indians whom it represents in the litigation. This consequence is involved in the representation. Kerrison v. StewartSearch
-
Shaw v. RailroadSearch
-
Beals v. IllSearch
-
should keep the land if the purchase price is not repaid, and thus frustrate the policy of the statute. United States v. TrinidadSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Heckman v. UnitedSearch
-
Indians, Tiger v. WesternSearch
-
Tiger v. WesternSearch
-
United States v. AmericanSearch
-
Minnesota v. HitchcockSearch
-
United States v. AllenSearch
-
Tiger v. PageSearch
-
Court. Cherokee Nation v. GeorgiaSearch
-
of Tiger v. WesternSearch
-
In United States v. AmericanSearch
-
of United States v. SanSearch
-
Kerrison v. StewartSearch
-
United States v. TrinidadSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial