Supreme Court· 3/31/1919
Lane v. Darlington
Citations
- 249 U.S. 331
- 39 S. Ct. 299
- 63 L. Ed. 629
- 1919 U.S. LEXIS 2130
Syllabus
<p>An official resurvey of the boundary of a patented Mexican'grant, for the purpose of defining contiguous public land, does- not operate as an adjudication against the grant owner or otherwise so affect his rights as to afford him ground for an injunction suit against the Secretary of the Interior.</p>
Judges: Holmes
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- United States v. State Investment Co.Supreme Court· 1924-02-18· cited 75×
- West v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court· 1929-01-02· cited 47×
- Phelps v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal· 1948-03-04· cited 18×
- United States v. Paul E. Reimann, and Maybeth Farr Reimann, His WifeTenth Circuit· 1974-10-09· cited 14×
- Ward v. RodriguezNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1939-03-01· cited 12×
- Greene v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1921-07-08· cited 10×
- Savage v. PackardSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1950-11-06· cited 6×
- United States v. RhodesEighth Circuit· 1925-01-08· cited 4×
- Mickadiet v. PayneD.C. Circuit· 1920-11-08· cited 4×
- United States v. State Inv. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1922-11-09· cited 4×
- United States v. LemonD. Colorado· 1986-03-28· cited 2×
- International Paper Co. v. MastersLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1958-05-26
- Carter v. ShortSupreme Court· 1939-11-06
- Koch v. United StatesD. Colorado· 1994-03-04
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.