United States v. Bellingham Bay Improvement Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Western District of Washington; Jeremiah Neterer, Judge. Suit in equity by the United States against the Bellingham Bay Improvement Company and others. Decree for defendants, and complainant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Western District of Washington; Jeremiah Neterer, Judge. Suit in equity by the United States against the Bellingham Bay Improvement Company and others. Decree for defendants, and complainant appeals. The United States brought this suit against the Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Company and other appellees, to cancel a land patent issued in 1904 to P. B. Cornwall, and to annul mesne conveyances and mortgages, and for other relief. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the action…
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The question presented is whether the court erred in ruling that the suit was barred by the statute of limitations. Under the doctrine of United States v. Diamond Coal & Coke Co., 255 U. S. 323, 41 Sup. Ct. 335, 65 L. Ed. 660, we are of the opinion that the complaint states a cause of action to which the defendants must plead. The allegations make it plain that in 1904 Cornwall obtained patent through deception and perjury, and thereafter all the conveyances set forth were made with knowledge of the fraudulent acts of Cornwall. The facts that the Puget…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bailey v. GloverSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Exploration Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- United States v. MinorSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- United States v. Diamond Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Linn & Lane Timber Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Southern Pac. R.District Court, S.D. California · 1926
- United States v. ChristopherCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1934
- United States v. NewtonDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1923