CALIFORNIA ex rel. STATE LANDS COMMISSION v. UNITED STATES
State of California, Ex Rel. State Lands Commission v. United States
Opinion
DECREE For the purpose of giving effect to the decision of this Court herein, announced June 18, 1982, 457 U. S. 273 , rehearing having been denied on September 9, 1982, 458 U. S. 1131 , It Is Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed:
1. As against the State of California and all those claiming under it, the United States holds all right, title and interest in the parcel of land described in the Complaint filed herein and in Exhibit A hereto, the seaward boundary of which shall be the line of mean high water of the Pacific Ocean, as heretofore or hereafter modified by accretion, erosion or reliction, whether attributable to natural or artificial causes;
2. The State of California has no right, title or interest in the said parcel of land, and the State, its agencies, political *2 subdivisions, officers and agents, and all those claiming under them or in privity with them, are enjoined from interfering in any way with the right, title, and interest of the United States in the said parcel;
3. Each party shall bear its own costs.
EXHIBIT A All that certain real property in the State of California, County of Humboldt situated in Townships 4 and 5 North, Range 1 West, Humboldt Base & Meridian (“HB&M”) and particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the east lU comer of Section 31, Township 5 North, Range 1 West HB&M, thence from said point of commencement; N 88°01'20" W, 1981.14 feet along the north line of U. S. Lot 3 of said Section 31, as said lot is shown on the official United States Government Township Plat, to the United States Meander Line of the Pacific Ocean as surveyed by J. S. Murray under contract dated October 18, 1854, and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: thence from said true point of beginning southerly along the shore of the Pacific Ocean with the meander lines of said Section 31 the following (3) courses:
1. S 14°38'54" W, 395.44 feet;
2. S 03°38'54" W, 1863.84 feet; and 3. S 10°21'06" E, 400.10 feet; to the United States Meander Corner on the Township line common to said Townships 4 and 5 North Range 1 West; thence southerly along the shore of the Pacific Ocean with the meander lines of Section 6 of Township 4 North, Range 1 West as surveyed by J. H. Miller under contract dated October 19, 1854, the following (3) courses:
1. S 08°24'17" W, 968.24 feet;
2. S 01°24'17" W, 869.50 feet; and 3. S 11°35'43" E, 646.26 feet more or less to the centerline of the North Jetty at the entrance to Humboldt Bay; thence westerly along said centerline the following (6) courses:
*3 1. N 75°15'58" W, 307.31 feet;
2. N 65°00'58" W, 431.97 feet;
3. N 52°05'24" W, 442.91 feet;
4. N 53°15'24" W, 408.72 feet;
5. N 50°02'05" W, 400.00 feet;
6. N 46°08'24" W, 1427 feet more or less to the line of mean high water of the Pacific Ocean; thence northerly along said line of mean high water to a point which bears N 88°01' 20" W, from the true point of beginning; thence S 88°01'20" E, along the north line of U. S. Lot 3, of Section 31 of Township 5 North, Range 1 West produced, to the true point of beginning.
Bearings and distances are based on the State of California Coordinate System (Lambert Conformal Projection), Zone 1, derived locally from that certain map entitled “Record of Survey, Surplus Property,” recorded in Book 29 of Surveys at Page 137, Humboldt County Records as surveyed by the United States Coast Guard; 12th District.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 4 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(limiting the role of the judiciary “to determining whether the procedures meet the essential standard of fairness under the Due Process Clause”)
-
(argument that jury instructions contravened holding in state case 3 insufficient to show state court was apprised of federal constitutional violation)
-
(in deciding a motion to dismiss, the court must not “assume that the 3 [plaintiff] can prove facts that it has not alleged or that the defendants have violated . . . 4 laws in ways that have not been alleged”)
-
(stating an alien’s due process rights)
Cited by 12 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.