Krueger v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. The case is stated in the opinion. A purchaser under a patent is not required to go behind ,the patent.' United States v. Laam, 149'Fed. Rep. 581. Mrs. Krueger was not bound to hunt for grounds of doubt, and in order to set the patent aside the United States must charge her with notice of the original fraud. United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Go:, 131 Fed.
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. The case is stated in the opinion. A purchaser under a patent is not required to go behind ,the patent.' United States v. Laam, 149'Fed. Rep. 581. Mrs. Krueger was not bound to hunt for grounds of doubt, and in order to set the patent aside the United States must charge her with notice of the original fraud. United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Go:, 131 Fed. Rep. 668; • United States v. Clark, 200 U. S. 601, 607, 609. If Benson, or his tenants were actually in possession of the land at the time of the purchase, by Mrs.…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Day
This is an appeal from a decree of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversing a decree of the District Court of Colorado which dismissed a bill of complaint filed by the United States against Emma T. Krueger for the cancellation of a certain patent upon public lands in Colorado.
The Government alleged in its bill that the land, eighty acres, patented to William E. Moses June 6,1910, upon a soldiers’ additional homestead entry (Rev. Stats., §§ 2306, 2307; 28 Stat. 397), had been secured by means of false affidavits, one by the entryman, Moses, who had made oath…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Simmons Creek Coal Co. v. DoranSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. DunmeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Ochoa v. Hernandez Y MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Brush v. WareSupreme Court of the United States · 1841
- Wright-Blodgett Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Southwestern Petroleum Corp. v. UdallCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1966
- Winkler v. AndrusCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
- Norm Advertising, Inc. v. ParkerLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1937
- First Nat. Bank of Eutaw v. BarnesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Winkler v. AndrusCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.