LUKENS

v.

OHIO

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (U.S. 1980)
  …ed the Black Hills for rations and grazing lands — an exchange Congress believed to be in the best interests of the Sioux and the Nation. This Court declined to review that judgment. Sioux Tribe v. United States, 97 Ct. Cl. 613 (1942), cert. denied, 318 U. S. 789 (1943). Yet today the Court permits Congress to reopen that judgment which this Court rendered final upon denying certiorari in 1943, and proceeds to reject the 1942 Court of Claims’ factual interpretation of the events in 1877. I am convinced that…

  ← 1 / 4 →
• Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Kneip, 430 U.S. 584 (U.S. 1977)
  …5 million acres, consisting of the Black Hills portion of the Great Sioux Reservation, were removed from the Reservation by the Act of February 28, 1877, 19 Stat. 254. See Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States, 97 Ct. Cl. 613 (1942), cert. denied, 318 U. S. 789 (1943). Of the remaining Reservation, approximately one-half was “restored to the public domain” under the Act of March 2, 1889, 25 Stat. 896, § 21,5 while six separate Reservations were carved out of the remainder, §§ 1-6. Section 2 set apart the R…
• The United States v. The Sioux Nation OF Indians, 518 F.2d 1298 (Ct. Cl. 1975)
  …DAVIS, Judge (dissenting in part): I disagree with the court’s holding that the decision in 97 Ct.Cl. 613 (1942), cert. denied, 318 U.S. 789, 63 S.Ct. 992, 87 L.Ed. 1155 (1943), is res adjudicata of [*1307] the Fifth Amendment taking claim now presented by the Sioux Nation.1 It is not easy to apply the general principles of former adjudication to this court’s decision in 97 Ct.Cl., and…

  ← 1 / 2 →