United States v. Apple
District Court, D. Kansas
In Equity. Suit by the United States against Walter T. Apple and others. On separate motions of several defendants to dismiss.
1Opinion of the Court
POLLOCK, District Judge.
The facts alleged in the petition filed herein, in so far as necessary to decision of separate motions of certain defendants to dismiss, may be briefly stated as follows:
Benjamin and See-sah Quapaw, full-blooded, ignorant Quapaw Indians, through allotment and inheritance, being the owners of three tracts of land in Ottawa county, Okl., described in the petition, in due form of law made certain mining leases covering the same, reserving as rental certain royalties in the minerals to be produced therefrom. The mining operations conducted by the lessors under said mining…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- United States v. KagamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- United States v. RickertSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Tiger v. Western Investment Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- United States v. SandovalSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- United States v. CelestineSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hanson v. HoffmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1940
- United States v. Dewey CountyDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 1926
- United States v. City of SalamancaDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1939
- Howell v. PorterDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1939
- United States v. MooreDistrict Court, E.D. Oklahoma · 1919