Matthews v. United States
United States Court of Claims
On the defendcmtd Demurrer. On the Proofs. The Reporter s’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, William Nelson, was appointed clerk of the United States court in the Indian Territory under the provisions of the act of March 1, 1889 (25 Stat. L., 783), and served as such clerk from April 1,1889, to June 30, 1892. II.
Read the full summary
On the defendcmtd Demurrer. On the Proofs. The Reporter s’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant, William Nelson, was appointed clerk of the United States court in the Indian Territory under the provisions of the act of March 1, 1889 (25 Stat. L., 783), and served as such clerk from April 1,1889, to June 30, 1892. II. On May 17,1890, the claimant, as such clerk, appointed Townsend N. Foster as deputy clerk of the United States court for the second division and Abram D. Matthews as deputy clerk of the United States court for the…
1Opinion of the CourtWeldoN, J.
On October 27, 1883, the claimant, Mathews, filed a petition (No. 18124) in which he substantially avers that in 1890 he was appointed by William Nelson, then clerk of the United States court in the Indian Territory, a deputy clerk of said court in the third judicial district of said Territory, in pursuance to an act of Congress to provide a temporary government for the Territory of Oklahoma; that he qualified as such deputjq and his appointment was duly approved by the United States court for said Territory by an order entered of record; that the said clerk resided in the third judicial…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Matthews v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1897
- Gardner v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1889
- Hanger v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1888
3Cited by1 opinion
- Alexander v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1908