Plested v. Abbey
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE DISTRICT OP COLORADO. The facts, which involve the right under the laws of the United States to purchase coal lands belonging to the United States, and the jurisdiction of the courts over the officers of the Land Department prior to issuing of the patent, are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE DISTRICT OP COLORADO. The facts, which involve the right under the laws of the United States to purchase coal lands belonging to the United States, and the jurisdiction of the courts over the officers of the Land Department prior to issuing of the patent, are stated in the opinion. The rights of the appellants, as well as the duty of the appellees, are to be found in § 2347, Rev. Stat., fixing twenty dollars per acre. That statute is not ambiguous. Its language admits of but one interpretation. If the receiver or register, or both,…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice White
The appellants prosecute this direct appeal from a decree sustaining a demurrer to a bill by them filed and dismissing the cause for want of jurisdiction. The suit concerned the right of the complainants under the laws of the United States to purchase certain coal lands belonging to the United States, and the defendants were the local land officers of the United States at Pueblo, Colorado.
The theory that the decree dismissing the bill is susceptible of being directly reviewed rests upon the assumption that the controversy, because of its nature and because of the official character of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Knight v. United States Land Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- United States v. SchurzSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- United States Ex Rel. Riverside Oil Co. v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- United States Ex Rel. Ness v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Brown v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Gnerich v. RutterSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Degge v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Proctor & Gamble Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Ickes v. UnderwoodCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944
- O'BRIEN v. CarneyDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1934
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.