Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 4/3/1916

Johnson v. Riddle

Citations

  • 240 U.S. 467
  • 36 S. Ct. 393
  • 60 L. Ed. 752
  • 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1473

Syllabus

<p>Under the provisions relating to town sites, in the Atoka Agreement bfetween the United States and the Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes (found in Act of June 28, 1898, c. 517; 30 Stat. 495, 505, 508),-the preferential right to purchase improved town lots was conferred upon the owner of “permanent, substantial, and valuable improvements, other than fences) tillage, and temporary houses,” without regard' to .the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the previous possession of the land-by the owner of the improvements.</p> <p>Under the provisions of the Atoka Agreement relating .to purchase of town lots- (30 Stat. 508), apd regulations contained in subsequent legislation, authority to appraise lots, improved or unimproved, to ascertain the ownership apd value'of the'improvements, and to dispose of the lots in conformity’ to the provisions of the Agreement, was conferred upon the town site commission, and afterwards upon the United States Indian Inspector, subject to the supervision of the .Secretary of the Interior.</p> <p>In case of contest,’the findings of fact by the Commission or the Inspector, affirmed on final - appeal by the Secretary of the Interior, are-binding upon the courts, in the absence of gross .mistake or fraud, and the judicial ■ inquiry is lipaited to determining whether there was clear error of law that resulted in awarding the right' of purchase, and ultimately issuing the patent, to the wrong party.</p> <p>The Atoka Agreement (Act .of June 28, 1898, c. 517, 30 Stat. 505,' 508), when ratified by Congress and by tjie Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes, superseded all customs, if .such there were, that had sanctioned the leasing of town lots to non-citizens of the tribes; and its provisions could not be carried’ into' effect without terminating existing rights of occupancy, if any, .saving as these coincided-with the ownership of permanent improvements.'</p> <p>A tenant is pot estopped to show that his landlord’s title has. expired' or has been terrhinated by opera

Judges: Pitney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.