TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Miami Tribe

United States v. The Miami Tribe of Oklahoma, Also Known as The Miami Tribe, and and Ira Sylvester Godfroy, and

United States v. Miami Tribe, 159 Ct. Cl. 593 (Ct. Cl. 1962)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Court of Claims · Federal Specialty Courts
Decided
November 16, 1962
Docket
No. App. No. 9-61
Citations
159 Ct. Cl. 5931962 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 1691962 WL 1616

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Indian claim; appeal from Indian Claims Commission; findings of Commission; adequacy of findings. — The Indian claimants brought suit under the Indian Claims Commission Act, 60 Stat. 1049 , to recover the difference between the amount they were paid for land ceded to the United States under the Treaty of October 6, 1818, 7 Stat. 189 , and the allegedly true value of the land, on the ground that the amount paid was unconscionably low. From a decision favorable to the claimants both parties appealed and on July 13, 1959, the Court of Claims affirmed the decision of the Commission in part and remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings and for correction of both primary and ultimate findings on the question of value. 146 Ct. Cl. 421 (Ind. Cl. Com. Docket Nos. 67 and 124). On June 30, 1960, the Indian Claims Commission issued its amended and additional findings of fact and opinion increasing the value of the land from 75 cents an acre in 1818 to $1.15 per acre. 9 Ind. Cl. Comm. 1 . Defendant appealed on the ground that the findings as amended were totally insuf *594 ficient under tlie court’s mandate in the case and in the light of the entire record, and that the amended conclusion of value was not supported by adequate findings or by the record. The Indian claimants filed a cross-appeal based on the contention that the land value determined by the Commission was still too low, and also filed a motion to dismiss the Government’s appeal as seeking an unauthorized further review of issues conclusively determined by the court on the first appeal.

Upon consideration of the cross-appeals and the motion to dismiss, together with the oral argument of counsel, the court, on November 16,1962, ordered that the motion to dismiss the appeal of the United States be denied and that the decree of the Indian Claims Commission be affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1966: 11980: 119662026peak 1966 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Yankton Sioux Tribe v. United States623 F.2d 159 (Ct. Cl. 1980)
  2. Nez Perce Tribe of Indians v. United States176 Ct. Cl. 815 (Ct. Cl. 1966)

Most recent

  1. Yankton Sioux Tribe v. United States623 F.2d 159 (Ct. Cl. 1980)
  2. Nez Perce Tribe of Indians v. United States176 Ct. Cl. 815 (Ct. Cl. 1966)

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.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Miami Tribe of Okla. v. United States, 175 F. Supp. 926 (Ct. Cl. 1959) 35

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list