Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
United States v. Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma
United States Court of Claims
Decided June 20, 1973No. Appeal No. 3-72; Ind Cl. Comm. Dockets Nos. 30, 30-A, 48, 48-APublished
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBennett, Judge
I concur with that portion of the majority opinion which holds that the Indian Claims Commission did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant-appellant’s motion to *146consolidate all five dockets discussed in the opinion. I agree, also, that in so holding we do not pass on the correctness of ■the principles enunciated 'by the Commission in Washoe Tribe v. United States, 21 Ind. Cl. Comm. 447 (1969), a case which was not appealed to this court. The troublesome issue of whether 'Indians are entitled to trespass damages prior to the date of extinguishment of aboriginal title is not in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Mitchell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Joslin Manufacturing Co. v. City of ProvidenceSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- R. J. Widen Company v. The United States and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- United States v. WhitehurstCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
- Volentine and Littleton v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1956
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.