Work v. United States Ex Rel. Mosier
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. This writ of error brings, in review a judgment of -the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, affirming a judgment of mandamus against the Secretary of the Interior commanding him to pay to the relators all • the moneys due their minor children, members of the Tribe of Osage Indians of Oklahoma, by reason of the distributions made under the Act of June 28, 1906, 34 Stat. 539, including their respective shares…
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. This writ of error brings, in review a judgment of -the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, affirming a judgment of mandamus against the Secretary of the Interior commanding him to pay to the relators all • the moneys due their minor children, members of the Tribe of Osage Indians of Oklahoma, by reason of the distributions made under the Act of June 28, 1906, 34 Stat. 539, including their respective shares of bonus moneys paid the Secretary for oil leases made by the Tribal Council'. The relators are W. T. Mosier and Louisa…
1Opinion of the Court
MR.. Chief Jttsíice Taft,
after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the Court.
The questions presented are, first, the proper classification of bonuses under the statute, second, the validity of the conditions imposed by the Secretary on the payment of the minors’ incomes to the parents, and third, the propriety of mandamus as a remedy in this case.
The bonus which was the result of bidding for desirable and profitable oil and gas leases secured for the members of the Osage Tribe the just value of the use of their property which the fixing of royalties in advance by the President…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Riverside Oil Co. v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- United States Ex Rel. Ness v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- United States Ex Rel. Hall v. PayneSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- United States Ex Rel. Alaska Smokeless Coal Co. v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
3Cited by50 opinions
- Burnet v. HarmelSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Work v. United States Ex Rel. RivesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Choteau v. BurnetSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- State Nat'l Bk. of Corpus Christi v. MorganTexas Supreme Court · 1940
- Murphy Oil Co. v. BurnetCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.