Henkel v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR'TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. The facts, which involve the rights of allottee Indians and the power of the Government to purchase improvements and make new allotments where the land allotted is needed for reclamation purposes, are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Day
This suit was an action in ejectment brought by the United States in the United States Circuit Court for the District of Montana, to recover certain lands in the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. The defendants (now plaintiffs in error) other than Henry Henkel are members of the Piegan Tribe of Indians. Henry Henkel is the husband of Caroline Henkel and the other-defendants to the action are their children. They lived together as a family and occupied the lands in question, upon which they had constructed certain buildings and improvements. On November 5, 1906, Caroline Henkel, for herself and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jones v. MeehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Williams v. First Nat. Bank of Pauls ValleySupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Lykins v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
3Cited by28 opinions
- Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian NationSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- United States v. City of Las CrucesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- State v. VickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- United States v. Alpine Land and Reservoir Co., and Truckee-Carson Irrigation District, United States of America v. Alpine Land and Reservoir Co., and Truckee-Carson Irrigation District v. Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of IndiansCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Alpine Land & Reservoir Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.