Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 3/7/1921

Winton v. Amos

Citations

  • 56 Ct. Cl. 472
  • 51 Ct. Cl. 284

Syllabus

<p>Judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants in the court below. On appeal the judgment as to Charles F. Win-ton and associates was reversed, and as to the other claimants affirmed, the Supreme Court deciding:</p> <p>The* acts authorizing these suits against Mississippi Choctaws (April 26, 1906, c. 1876, sec. 9, 34 Stat., 140; May 29, 1908, c. 216 sec. 27, 35 Stat., 457) contemplate not an action in personam to establish personal liability against individual Indians, or a group of them, but an equitable class suit against those who, by successfully asserting citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, acquired allotments out of the tribal land and participation in funds held in trust by the United States, to impose an equitable charge upon their lands and interest, so acquired, for a reasonable and proportionate contribution towards the value of the services rendered and expenses incurred by the claimants in securing such lands and interests for the class.</p> <p>The acts, in treating the Indians affected as a class, and in providing for their representation by the governor of the Choctaw Nation for the purpose of receiving notice of the suit and by the Attorney General of the United States for the purpose of appearing and defending it, and in omitting to make the United States a party, are within the constitutional authority of Congress over tribal Indians and their property, and do not .deprive the Indians of their property in violation of the fifth amendment, although they are-citizens.</p> <p>For proper professional services rendered and expenses incurred in successfully promoting legislation to rescue substantial property interests of a class of beneficiaries under a trust of a public nature, it is equitable to impose a charge for reimbursement and compensation upon the interests so secured, the same as if. a like result had' been reached through litigation in the courts.</p> <p>Where such services, inuring to the benefit of a class, are performed under express c

How courts have described this case

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

  • allowing attorneys' fees in equity for legislative work substantially instrumental in creating a fund, citing Trustees v. Greenough, 105 U.S. 527, 26 L.Ed. 1157 (1881)
  • allowing attorneys’ fees in equity for legislative work substantially instrumental in creating a fund, citing Trustees v. Greenough, 105 U.S. 527, 26 L.Ed. 1157 (1881)
  • allowing fees in equity for legislative work \substantially instrumental in producing a result beneficial to the class of cestuis que trustent upon whose interests the charge [was] to be imposed\
  • Congress’ “plenary authority” is based on Indians’ “condition of tutelage or dependency”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pitney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite 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.