Legal Opinion
C. F. Pruess, Sr. v. Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of Interior
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided November 19, 1965No. 18907PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Circuit Judge:
The Secretary of the Interior has determined after hearings that appellant did not make a mineral discovery sufficient to support a claim to patent Government lands. The land involved is in Oregon and appellant is an Oregon resident. Appellant sought review of the Secretary’s decision in the District Court in the District of Columbia. 5 U.S.C. § 1009 (1965). Appellant alleged, among other things, that the Secretary’s decision was arbitrary, capricious and contrary to the evidence. The trial court sustained the Secretary’s decision.
We have held in the past that the…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hoffman v. BlaskiSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Ex Parte CollettSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Everett Foster v. Fred A. Seaton, Secretary of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1959
- Henry S. Morgan v. Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1962
- Seay v. KaplanDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 1964
3Cited by17 opinions
- Margaret E. Coffey v. Van Dorn Iron Works, an Ohio CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad v. Brotherhood of Railroad TrainmenSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Lamont v. HaigCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1978
- Lamont v. HaigCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1978
- Swinton v. J. Frank Kelly, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.