Garfield v. United States Ex Rel. Goldsby
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The facts are stated in the opinion. The matters referred to in the petition are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior and not subject to judicial review. The matters referred to in the petition relate to the allotment of land and distribution of the property of the Chickasaw Nation, one of the Five Civilized Tribes in the Indian Territory. As to this there can be no question.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The facts are stated in the opinion. The matters referred to in the petition are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior and not subject to judicial review. The matters referred to in the petition relate to the allotment of land and distribution of the property of the Chickasaw Nation, one of the Five Civilized Tribes in the Indian Territory. As to this there can be no question. Enrollment is merely an incident of the allotment scheme. The allotment and distribution of the tribal lands and other tribal…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Day
This action was brought in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia for a writ of mandamus against the Secretary of the Interior in his official capacity, to require him to erase certain marks and notations theretofore made by his.predecessor in office upon the rolls, striking therefrom the name of the relator Goldsby as an approved member of the Chickasaw Nation, and to restore him to enrollment as a member of the nation.
Goldsby, in his petition, claimed that he was a recognized citizen of the Chickasaw Nation and entitled to an equal undivided interest in the lands of the Choctaw and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Noble v. Union River Logging RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Board of Liquidation v. McCombSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Wallace v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Love v. FlahiveSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
3Cited by100 opinions
- Railroad Commission of Texas v. Shell Oil Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1942
- Jones v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Wilbur v. United States Ex Rel. KadrieSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Work v. United States Ex Rel. RivesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
95 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.