Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

131 U.S. 21

33 L. Ed. 93

Docket No. 1061.

United States v. Drew

Supreme Court of the United States

Argued January 28, 29,1889. —

Decided May 13, 1889.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1889-05-13

<p>error to the circuit court of the united states for the WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA.</p> <p>The case is stated in tHe opinion.</p>

2 counsel of record

Relies on Ex Parte Nielsen

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · 6–2 · Decided 1889-05-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 129 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2015 · most notably United States v. Phillips (1981), United States v. Thomas (1985)

105 federal appellate · 8 district ·

27018891890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1error to the circuit court of the united states for the WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA.

¶2United States v. Jones, ante, 1, affirmed and applied to this case.

¶3The case is stated in tHe opinion.

¶4Mr. Solicitor General for plaintiff in error.

¶5Mr. James L. 'Bradford for defendant in error.

¶6Mr. Justice Bradley

¶7delivered the opinion of the court.

¶8This is a suit in equity brought against the United States to establish the claim of the plaintiff to have land warrants or certificates of location for one thousand and fifteen acres of land made out and delivered to him by way of indemnity and satisfaction for a certain concession or grant of land made by the Spanish governor to one Francisco Adante, in 1788, the land itself having been surveyed as public land by the United States and disposed of to purchasers. The claim is made under the provisions of the act of June 2d, 1858, entitled “An act to provide for the location of certain confirmed private land claims of the State of Missouri, and for other purposes,” 11 Stat. 294, the claim in question having been confirmed by act of Congress passed February 28, 1823, 3 Stat. 727. The suit is subject to the same objections which exist in relation to the suits of Carrie Jones and others, just disposed of, and the same decree must be made as in those cases.

¶9The decree of the Circuit Court is reversed, am,d the cause rema/nded, with instructions to dismiss the originad petition or hill.

¶10Mr. Justice Miller and Mr. Justice Field dissented, for the reasons stated in their dissent in United States v. Jones.

/131/us/21 · .json · Public domain