Legal Opinion
Capoeman v. United States
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided August 27, 1952No. 1101PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JAMES ALGER FEE, District Judge.
Horton Capoeman and Emma Capoeman, his wife, both citizens of the United States, hereinafter referred to as “plaintiffs,” are noncompetent Indian wards of the United States under the supervision and control of the Taholah Indian Agency. They are full-blood Quinaielt Indians, born and residing on the. Quinaielt Reservation in the State of Washington.
Under the provisions of the Quinaielt Treaty with the United States, dated July 1, 1855, and January 25, 1856, 12 Stat. 971, Quinaielt Indian tribal lands were transferred to the United States, but there was reserved…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- The Cherokee TobaccoSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Choteau v. BurnetSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Superintendent of Five Civilized Tribes v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Oklahoma Tax Commission v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Parker v. RileySupreme Court of the United States · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Squire v. CapoemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Walker v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962
- Hayes Big Eagle (1), Ruby Bolton (2), and Charles Whitehorn (3) v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1962
- United States v. LambDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1957
- Clark Squire, Collector of Internal Revenue for the District of Washington v. Horton Capoeman and Emma Capoeman, His WifeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.