Legal Opinion
Tiger v. Slinker
District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
Decided March 19, 1925No. 2917PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WILLIAMS, District Judge.
It is conceded that the only question involved in this case is as to whether a noncitizen husband of a deceased Creek allottee inherits any interest in the lands of the Creek Nation allotted to such decedent, where such descent was east after the passage of the Act of May 27, 1908 (35 Stat. 312), to wit, on March 14, 1919. In Hill et al. v. Rankin (D. C.) 289 F. 511, decided on May 24, 1923, it was said:
“As to restricted lands in the Creek Nation, where descent was east subsequent to the taking effect of Act of May 27, 1908 (35 Stat. 312, e. 199), is sueh descent…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Green v. BiddleSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Magoun v. Illinois Trust & Savings BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Shulthis v. McDougalSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Kidd v. PearsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Jones v. MeehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dunn v. MiccoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1939
- Kunkel v. BarnettDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1926
- Tiger v. TimmonsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931