McDougal v. McKay
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OKLAHOMA. The facts, which involve the construction and effect of the Supplemental Creek Agreement of June 30, 1902, and the ascertainment of heirs of an infant of the Creek Nation enrolled after death, are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McReynolds
The solution of this controversy requires ascertainment of the heirs of an infant who was enrolled after death, within the intendment of the Supplemental Creek Agreement — Act of June 30, 1902 (c. 1323, 32 Stat. 500).
Andrew J. Berryhill, born in May, 1901, died during the following November leaving his father — George Franklin Berryhill — an enrolled Creek Indian, his mother, a non-citizen of that Nation, and seven paternal uncles and aunts. His name was duly placed on the tribal rolls in October, 1902, and during the years 1904 and 1905 the land presently in controversy (with others) was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Shulthis v. McDougalSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Washington v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Sizemore v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Duff v. KeatonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Maharry v. EatmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Murphy v. RoyalCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- United States v. WildcatSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Chupco v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Campbell v. WadsworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Homer v. LesterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.