Lane v. United States Ex Rel. Mickadiet
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The facts, which involve the .construction of the act of February 8, 1887, and the jurisdiction of the courts to control by mandamus the action of the Secretary of the Interior concerning an allotment thereunder, are stated in the opinion. Since the United States, the real party defendant, has not consented to be sued in this cause, it should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The facts, which involve the .construction of the act of February 8, 1887, and the jurisdiction of the courts to control by mandamus the action of the Secretary of the Interior concerning an allotment thereunder, are stated in the opinion. Since the United States, the real party defendant, has not consented to be sued in this cause, it should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The United States is the real party defendant. Na-ganab v. Hitchcock, 202 U. S. 473; Oregon v. Hitchcock, 202 U. S. 60. The immunity of the United States…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice White
The relators, who are defendants in error, invoked the aid of the trial court to control by mandamus the action of the Secretary of the Interior concerning an allotment in severalty of land -made to an Indian in pursuance of the authority conferred by the act of February 8, 1887 (c. 119, 24 Stat. 388), entitled “An Act to provide for the allotment of lands in severalty to Indians on the various reservations.” Under the facts stated in his return to the alternative rule the Secretary, asserting that the land embraced by the allotment in question was held in trust by the United States for the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. SchurzSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Michigan Land & Lumber Co. v. RustSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Brown v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- United States Ex Rel. Knight v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
3Cited by48 opinions
- Board of Comm'rs of Jackson Cty. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Wilbur v. United States Ex Rel. KadrieSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company v. Hendry CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- Cassarello v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1919
- Plainfield-Union Water Co. v. Borough of MountainsideSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.