Nickles v. Wells
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from the Third Judicial District Court. The facts appear in the opinion. The defendants in the action of Wells v. Patton were not officers, but mere private agents, of the United States as a corporation, which is vested with the same rights of action and to take its own property as a private citizen has.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Third Judicial District Court. The facts appear in the opinion. The defendants in the action of Wells v. Patton were not officers, but mere private agents, of the United States as a corporation, which is vested with the same rights of action and to take its own property as a private citizen has. Dugan v. TI. /S'., 3 "Wheat. 181; see circular in Record, 1855. The land department assumes the agency of timber by reason of its general functions under the land laws. Stephenson v. Little, 10 Mich. The United States could not be sued, but its agents could, and the judgment made…
1Opinion of the Court
BoRemaN, 'J\,
delivered the opinion of the court:
Oliver A. Patton and Y. M. C. Silva were respectively register and receiver of the land office in Salt Lake City, and, as such, they were timber agents of the United States Government, and Eiehard Greenway was, under the register and receiver, a deputy timber agent. These parties, as timber agents of the government, seized and sold for the government certain logs and lumber cut from government lands and sawed *171at tbe mills owned and operated by the.appellant, and on wbicb no stumpage bad been paid. At the sale the respondent became the purchaser,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Park v. WilkinsonUtah Supreme Court · 1900