MOORE
v.
STONE
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 upheld a Washington state court's judgment invalidating an order by the Secretary of the Interior that withdrew odd-numbered sections of land from public sale within the Northern Pacific Railroad Company's indemnity limits based solely on the railroad's map of definite location. The Court held that such a withdrawal order was not authorized by the Act of July 2, 1864, under which the railroad claimed title to the lands, affirming the state court's decision on that basis.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Harlan,
after stating the facts as above reported, delivered the opinion of the court.
'As in the other cases just decided, the plaintiff’s right to recover depended upon the validity of the order made by the Secretary of the Interior directing the 'withdrawal from sale or entry under the preemption and homestead laws of the United States of the odd-numbered sections of land within the indemnity limits of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company as defined by its map of definite location.' The order was based wholly upon the filing and acceptance of' that map, and in advance of any selection based on ascertained losses of distinct tracts in the place limits.
For the reasons stated in Hewitt v. Schultz, such order must be regarded as not authorized by the act of July 2,1864, under which the railroad company and its grantee claimed title; and upon that ground the judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of "Washington must be and is
Affirmed.
IVf-R.. Justice White concurred in the result.
Mr. Justice Bee wee and Mr. Justice Shieas dissented.