PERRIN
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Private Land Claims' rejection of a land grant claim based on alleged deficiencies in the property description, holding that the claimants should be given an opportunity on remand to identify and satisfactorily locate a specific tract within the purchased area that could equitably be recognized as the granted land.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Brewer delivered the opinion of the court.
So far as the question of title is concerned this case is similar to the one immediately preceding, Camou v. United States, ante, 277. For reasons therein stated the decree of the Court of Private Land Claims will be reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings'. It is true, as suggested in its opinion, the Court of Private Land Claims thought that there was no sufficient location of the tract in controversy, and that probably the grant was void for uncertainty in the description of the property. It may be that this conclusion was fight. At the same time, in view of what has been recently said by this court in respect to boundaries, description and area, we think that justice requires that we reverse, the judgment and remand the case for further proceedings. Perhaps the claimants may be able to satisfactorily identify a tract not larger than the area purchased and paid for which should equitably be recognized as the tract granted.
Reversed
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reloj Cattle Co. v. United States, 184 U.S. 624 (U.S. 1902)…o more is plain, and is controlling.-. The title of the grantee was limited to that quantity. Ainsa v. United States, 161 U. S. 208; Ely’s Administrator v. United States, 171 U. S. 220; United States v. Maish, 171 U. S. 277; Perrin v. United States, 171 U. S. 292. The cabida legal, or lawful area, was, therefore, four sitios or something over seventeen thousand three hundred and fifty acres, and this lawful area, “ the four sitios,” was described by Perez as “ the depopulated place down the San Pedro River,…
-
United States v. Green, 185 U.S. 256 (U.S. 1902)…ase was made, and were had under the same laws, and the two grants were made by the same officer.” The case in the particular stated is, therefore, ruled by Ely v. United States, supra; United States v. Maish, 171 U. S. 277; Perrin v. United States, 171 U. S. 292; and United States v. Camou, and Reloj Cattle Company v. United States, 184 U. S. 624. ' As from the evidence the Court of Private Land'Claims was able to determine the true boundaries of the tract as limited, the cases just cited are also authorit…