Supreme Court· 6/11/1973

Mattz v. Arnett

Citations

412 U.S. 481
93 S. Ct. 2245
37 L. Ed. 2d 92
1973 U.S. LEXIS 57

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that the policy of the Dawes Act “was to continue the reservation system and the trust status of Indian lands”
observing that Congress generally employs “clear language of express termination when that result is desired”
“[A]llot- ment under the . . . Act is completely consistent with con- tinued reservation status”
1892 act opening Klamath River Reservation to settlement under Homestead Act did not disestablish reservation
Klamath River Reservation ideal for the Indians because of the river’s abundance of salmon and other fish
consideration of uncertain future sales of land to settlers important factor in finding that tribe retained interest in land

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Blackmun, Blackmtfn

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

204 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Mattz v. Arnett

3 other CourtListener records share this case 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.