Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-21-1915
Oregon & California Railroad Co. v. United States - 238 U.S. 393 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Oregon & California Railroad Co. v. United States, 238 U.S. 393 (1915) Oregon & California Railroad Company v. United States No. 679 Argued April 23, 26, 27, 1915 Decided June 21, 1915 238 U.S. 393 CERTIFICATE FROM AND CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Where there are doubts whether a clause be a covenant or condition, courts will incline against the latter, and, as a general principle, a court of equity is reluctant to lend its aid to enforce a forfeiture. The provisos in the Land Grant Act of July 25, 1866, as amended June 25, 1868, and April 10, 1869, and in the Act of May 4, 1870, to the effect that the lands granted must be sold by railroad companies Page 238 U. S. 394 only to actual settlers in quantities not exceeding 160 acres to each and at a price not exceeding two dollars and fifty cents per acre, are not conditions subsequent, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-08-1915
La Roque v. United States - 239 U.S. 62 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court La Roque v. United States, 239 U.S. 62 (1915) La Roque v. United States No. 240 Argued October 15, 18, 1915 Decided November 8, 1915 239 U.S. 62 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The Nelson Act of January 14, 1889, c. 24, 25 Stat. 642, for allotment to Chippewas of the White Earth Indian Reservation contemplated only selections on the part of living Indians acting for themselves or through designated representatives. There was no displacement of the usual rule that incidents of tribal membership, like the membership itself, are terminated by death. Page 239 U. S. 63 While not conclusive, the construction given to an act of Congress relative to Indian allotment in the course of its actual execution by the Secretary of the Interior is entitled to great respect, and ought not to be overruled without cogent and persuasive reasons. The fact that the act provided for a cens...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-14-1915
Woodward v. De Graffenried - 238 U.S. 284 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Woodward v. De Graffenried, 238 U.S. 284 (1915) Woodward v. De Graffenried No. 164 Submitted February 25, 1915 Decided June 14, 1915 238 U.S. 284 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA Syllabus In an action to determine by what law the beneficiaries of a Creek allotment are to be determined where the allotment was selected by a Creek citizen and made by the Dawes Commission under 11 of the Curtis Act of June 28, 1898, followed first by the death of the allottee after receiving the allotment and prior to the Original Creek Agreement and then by action of the Commission, after ratification of that agreement, awarding the land to the heirs of the deceased allottee, and the ultimate issue of a patent to them, held, after reviewing the history of the legislation of Congress in regard to distribution of Creek lands, that: The only lawful authority possessed by the Dawes Commission to allot Creek ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-14-1915
Producers Oil Co. v. Hanzen - 238 U.S. 325 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Producers Oil Co. v. Hanzen, 238 U.S. 325 (1915) Producers Oil Co. v. Hanzen No. 165 Submitted March 3, 1915 Decided June 14, 1915 238 U.S. 325 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA Syllabus The effect of riparian rights, attached to land conveyed by patent of the United States, depends upon the local law. As a general rule, meanders are not to be treated as boundaries, and when the United States conveys a tract of land by patent referring to an official survey which shows the same bordering on a navigable river, the purchaser takes title up to the waterline. Where the facts and circumstances, however, affirmatively disclose n intention to limit the grant to actual traverse lines, these must be treated as definite boundaries, and a patent to a fractional section does not necessarily confer riparian rights because of the presence of meanders. Where, as in this case, the survey of improved ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-23-1915
Bosley v. McLaughlin - 236 U.S. 385 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Bosley v. McLaughlin, 236 U.S. 385 (1915) Bosley v. McLaughlin Nos. 362 and 363 Argued January 12, 1915 Decided February 23, 1915 236 U.S. 385 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus The nature of the work of pharmacists and student nurses in hospitals and the importance to the public that it should not be performed by those overfatigued, make it a proper subject for legislative control as to hours of labor of women so employed. Whether there is necessity for limiting the hours of labor of women pharmacists and nurses in hospitals is a matter for legislative, and not judicial, control, and the legislature is not prevented by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from limiting such labor to eight hours a day or a maximum of forty-eight hours a week. Such a restriction is not so palpably arbitrary as to be an unconstitutional invasion of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-01-1915
Sawyer v. Gray - 237 U.S. 674 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Sawyer v. Gray, 237 U.S. 674 (1915) Sawyer v. Gray No. 632 Argued April 22, 1915 Decided June 1, 1915 237 U.S. 674 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Daniels v. Wagner, ante, p. 237 U. S. 547 , followed to the effect that the Secretary of the Interior has no discretionary power to refuse to allow land properly selected for exchange under the Forest Lieu Land Act of June 4, 1897, to be patented to an applicant who has complied with all statutory requirements in regard to such exchange. The facts, which involve the construction of the Forest Lieu Lands Act of 1897 and the extent of discretionary power on the Secretary of the Interior to reject applications for exchange of lands thereunder, are stated in the opinion. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court. This case is controlled by Daniels v. Wagner, No. 239, ante, p. 237 U. S. 547 , recently decided. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-23-1915
United States v. Midwest Oil Co. - 236 U.S. 459 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Midwest Oil Co., 236 U.S. 459 (1915) United States v. Midwest Oil Company No. 278 Ordered for reargument before full bench April 20, 1914 Reargued May 7, 1914 Decided February 23, 1915 236 U.S. 459 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Prior to initiation of some right given by law, the citizen has no enforceable interest in the public statutes and no private right in land which is the property of the people. The practice of the withdrawal of public lands, both mineral and nonmineral, from private acquisition by the President without special authorization from Congress, after Congress has opened them to occupation, dates from an early period in the history of the government, and the power so exercised has never been repudiated by Congress, although it has always been subject to disaffirmance thereby. The Land Department, charged with the administr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Nov-01-1915
Rio Grande Western Ry. Co. v. Stringham - 239 U.S. 44 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Rio Grande Western Ry. Co. v. Stringham, 239 U.S. 44 (1915) Rio Grande Western Railway Company v. Stringham Nos. 4, 5 Submitted October 19, 1915 Decided November 1, 1915 239 U.S. 44 ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH Syllabus A railway company brought suit to establish its title under the Right-of-Way Act of 1875 to certain lands in fee, and the trial court found for defendant; on appeal, the appellate court reversed with directions to enter judgment awarding the railway company a right of way; on the trial court's entering such a judgment, the railway company again appealed, contending that, according to the true effect of the Right-of-Way Act, it had title in fee, but the appellate court affirmed the judgment as entered. On writs of error taken to both judgments, on separate writs, held that: As the first judgment of the appellate court disposed of the case on the merits and le...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-14-1915
Geneva Furniture Mfg. Co. v. S. Karpen & Bros. - 238 U.S. 254 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Geneva Furniture Mfg. Co. v. S. Karpen & Bros., 238 U.S. 254 (1915) Geneva Furniture Manufacturing Company v. S. Karpen & Bros. No. 496 Submitted December 17, 1914 Decided June 14, 1915 238 U.S. 254 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Syllabus Where the plaintiff really makes a substantial claim under an Act of Congress, the district court has jurisdiction whether the claim ultimately be held good or bad. The Fair v. Kohler Die Co., 228 U. S. 22 . Jurisdiction is the power to consider and decide one way or the other as the law may require; it is not to be declined because it is not foreseen with certainty that the party invoking it may succeed. Where a bill includes several causes of action, some arising under the patent laws and others on breach of contractual relations, and one of the defendants is a corporation that cannot be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-15-1915
Wilson Cypress Co. v. Del Pozo y Marcos - 236 U.S. 635 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court Wilson Cypress Co. v. Del Pozo y Marcos, 236 U.S. 635 (1915) Wilson Cypress Company v. Del Pozo y Marcos No. 135 Argued January 19, 1915 Decided March 15, 1915 236 U.S. 635 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Although the jurisdiction of the federal court may have been invoked solely on account of diverse citizenship, if the object of the suit is to quiet title to a grant of the former sovereign, depending for its completeness on a treaty and on laws of the United States and acts of federal officers thereunder, this Court has jurisdiction to review the judgment of the circuit court of appeals. Although the amount of land patented to the grantee of a former sovereign may have exceeded the amount confirmed by the act of Page 236 U. S. 636 Congress and have been predicated upon a survey and limitation to the amount confirmed, the patentee has a taxable intere...
Tag this Judgment!