Nofire v. United States
Citations
- 164 U.S. 657
- 17 S. Ct. 212
- 41 L. Ed. 588
- 1897 U.S. LEXIS 1698
Syllabus
<p>The fact that a marriage license has been issued carries with it a presumption that all statutory prerequisites thereto have been complied with, and one who claims to the contrary must affirmatively show the fact.</p> <p>Persons coming to a public office to transact business who find a person in charge of it and transacting its business in a regular way, are not bound to ascertain his authority to so act; but.to them he is an officer defacto, to whose acts the same validity and the same presumptions attach as to those of an officer de jure.</p> <p>The evidence shows that the deceased sought, in his lifetime, to become a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, took all the steps he supposed necessary therefor, considered himself a citizen, and that the Cherokee Nation in his lifetime recognized him as a .citizen and still asserts his citizenship. Held, that, under those circumstances, it must be adjudged that he was a citizen by adoption, and consequently that the jurisdiction over the offence charged is, by the laws of the United States and treaties with the Cherokee Nation, vested in the courts of that Nation.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating “one who claims that any such prerequisite did not exist must affirmatively show the fact”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brewer
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Duro v. ReinaSupreme Court· 1990-05-29· cited 294×
- Butler Bros. Shoe Co. v. United States Rubber Co.Eighth Circuit· 1907-10-25· cited 143×
- Bowles v. Farmers Nat. Bank of Lebanon, Ky.Sixth Circuit· 1945-02-16· cited 89×
- Lewis v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1929-12-04· cited 83×
- Tecom, Inc. v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2005-06-27· cited 64×
- United States v. RoyerSupreme Court· 1925-05-25· cited 56×
- EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO., Defendant-AppelleeSecond Circuit· 1981-05-27· cited 51×
- Knight v. VernonFourth Circuit· 2000-06-02· cited 49×
- Stanley Siegel v. Juanita M. Kreps, Individually and as Secretary of the United States Department of CommerceD.C. Circuit· 1981-04-13· cited 47×
- Ford v. Delta & Pine Land Co.Supreme Court· 1897-01-04· cited 43×
- Martinez v. Southern Ute Tribe of Southern Ute ReservationTenth Circuit· 1957-11-15· cited 22×
- Raymond v. RaymondEighth Circuit· 1897-11-15· cited 19×
- Oliver v. United StatesFourth Circuit· 1920-07-06· cited 18×
- Wischhusen v. American Medicinal Spirits Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1933-01-11· cited 16×
- Greenfield School District v. Hannaford Special School DistrictNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1910-06-20· cited 15×
- Martinez v. Southern Ute TribeTenth Circuit· 1957-12-17· cited 13×
- State ex rel. Johnson v. ElyNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1912-09-03· cited 12×
- United States ex rel. Feld v. BullardSecond Circuit· 1923-05-07· cited 12×
- United States v. 15.3 Acres of Land, More or Less, Situate in the City of ScrantonM.D. Pennsylvania· 1957-08-15· cited 11×
- Ex parte Van MooreD. South Dakota· 1915-02-18· cited 10×
Cites
4 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.