TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Houston

Northern Pacific Railway Company v. Houston

Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Houston, 231 U.S. 181 (1913)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
December 1, 1913
Docket
No. 57
Judges
White
Citations
231 U.S. 18134 S. Ct. 11358 L. Ed. 1761913 U.S. LEXIS 2555
Syllabus
Decided on the authority of Northern Pacific Railway Company v, Wass, 219 U. S. 426.
Summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The facts are stated in the opinion.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion — White

Memorandum opinion by Mr. Chief Justice White, by direction of the court.

In Northern Pacific Ry. Co.

v. Wass, 104 Minnesota, 411, it was decided that lands claimed under an indemnity grant, and described in lists of indemnity selections filed in the appropriate United States Land Office and which were rightfully pending for action by the proper officer were nevertheless subject to entry by others to the destruction of the right to select and to the frustration of the governmental power to approve the selections and award the land under the granting law. The judgment below which is now under review, was expressly rested by the court on the ruling in the Wass Case. Houston v. Northern Pacific Ry., 109 Minnesota, 273. The identity between the controversies here presented and the one which was passed on in the Wass Case is additionally shown by the fact that it is stated in the printed argument on behalf of the railroad company, the plaintiff in error, there being no argument on behalf of the defendant in error, that the land involved in this case was covered by selections made at the same time the selections which were involved in the Wass Case were made, and were embraced in the identical lists which were the subject of contest in that case. But since this case was decided by the court below, its ruling in the Wass Case was reviewed by this court and it was reversed, thereby destroying the only foundation upon which the judgment in this case could possibly rest.

Northern Pacific Railway Company v. Wass, 219 U. S. 426 . It follows for the reasons stated in the Wass Case, and upon the authority of that case, the judgment below must be *183 reversed and the case be remanded to the court below for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion in the Wass Case and the action which we now take in applying the decision in that case.

Reversed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1917: 21918: 11926: 11937: 11955: 11964: 119172026peak 1917 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Mehl v. Norton275 N.W. 843 (Minn. 1937)
  2. Makemson v. Dillon171 P. 673 (N.M. 1918)
  3. United States v. Strand6 C.M.A. 297 (1955)
  4. United States v. Phillips14 C.M.A. 620 (1964)
  5. Great Northern Railway Co. v. Reed270 U.S. 539 (1926)
  6. López v. Foote25 P.R. 513 (1917)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Phillips14 C.M.A. 620 (1964)
  2. United States v. Strand6 C.M.A. 297 (1955)
  3. Mehl v. Norton275 N.W. 843 (Minn. 1937)
  4. Great Northern Railway Co. v. Reed270 U.S. 539 (1926)
  5. Makemson v. Dillon171 P. 673 (N.M. 1918)
  6. López v. Foote25 P.R. 513 (1917)

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
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Wass, 219 U.S. 426 (1911) 7

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