Legal Opinion

Shaw v. Work

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided November 2, 1925No. 4191PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

Appellant, plaintiff below, as attorney in fact for one N. R. Waterman, filed a bill in equity in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, seeking a mandatory injunction to compel defendant Hubert Work, as Secretary of the Interior, to vacate, set aside, and hold for naught certain decisions theretofore made relative to certain lands situated in the state of Oregon, which plaintiff sought to select in lieu of lands surrendered to the United States for forest reserve purposes. From a decree' dismissing the bill, plaintiff appealed.

In the year 1900 the land…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. Midwest Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
  2. Linn & Lane Timber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Linn & Lane Timber Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
  4. Byron v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1919
  5. United States v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · 1910

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. 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
  2. United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
  3. (PC) Morgan v. Sacramento County Sheriffs Dept.District Court, E.D. California · 2020
  4. Blevins v. IwuagwuDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
  5. Dawes v. The People of the State of CaliforniaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2024

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API