Legal Opinion
Bowman v. Udall
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 16, 1965No. Civ. A. 105-63PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtTamm, District Judge
(by designation) .
This case involves the question of whether the Secretary of the Interior has the authority to restore the subsurface of certain lands in the State of Arizona to the San Carlos Apache Tribe of Indians. The land involved constitutes that tract hereinafter designated as the Mineral Strip.
By Order No. 2874 (28 Fed.Reg. 4608), former Under Secretary of the Interior James K. Carr restored these subsurface lands to the Indians “subject to any valid existing rights” and exclusive of “any patented lands or any interest in any patented lands. * * * ”
Plaintiffs, who own patented lands…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Unemployment Compensation Comm'n of Alaska v. AragonSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Power Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Choate v. TrappSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Stevens v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., & Hugh Brown, United States of America v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., and Hugh BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Grant M. Acton v. United States v. W. Clifton v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- District of Columbia v. FaisonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.