Indians of Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in the State of North Dakota v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtBooth, Chief Justice
The Congress enacted the special jurisdictional act set forth in full in Finding I. The obvious purpose of the act is the adjudication of plaintiffs’ rights accruing legally or equitably in virtue of any treaties, agreements, laws of Congress, or misappropriation of funds. The controversy is by the record narrowed to three claims, viz, the alleged taking by the Government of lands embraced within the Indians’ reservation without their consent and without compensation; second, a claim for $50,000 for the value of timber alleged to have been cut and taken from their reservation by white…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mitchel and Others v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
- Williams v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Gassert v. NoyesMontana Supreme Court · 1896
- Mitchell v. CarderWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by21 opinions
- Miami Tribe of Oklahoma v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1959
- Minnesota Chippewa Tribe v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- The Cherokee Nation, and Its Attorneys, Paul M. Niebell, Earl Boyd Pierce, George E. Norvell, and Dennis W. Bushyhead v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
- Crow Tribe of Indians v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960
- United States v. James Junior FinchCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.