United States v. Coleman
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Black
In 1956 respondent Coleman applied to the Department of the Interior for a patent to certain public lands based on his entry onto and exploration of these lands and his discovery there of a variety of stone called quartzite, one of the most common of all solid materials. It was, and still is, respondent Coleman’s contention that the quartzite deposits qualify as “valuable mineral deposits” under 30 U. S. C. § 22 1 and make the land “chiefly valuable for building stone” under 30 U. S. C. § 161. 2 The Secretary of the Interior held that to qualify as “valuable mineral deposits” under 30 U. S.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Best v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Cameron v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Chrisman v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
3Cited by174 opinions
- United States v. Hiram WebbCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Andrus v. Charlestone Stone Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Wind River Mining Corporation v. United States of America Manuel Lujan, Jr. Delos Jacobson, Director of the Bureau of Land ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- State of Washington v. Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- Watt v. Western Nuclear, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
169 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.