SANAPAW ET AL.

v.

WISCONSIN

Citator

Cited By

• Hill v. United States, 363 F.2d 176 (5th Cir. 1966)
  …ant and otherwise admissible to determine willfulness is not made inadmissible merely because the act or omission offered occurred shortly after the returns in question were filed. United States v. Northern, 329 F. 2d 794 (6th Cir. 1964), cert. den. 377 U.S. 991, 84 S.Ct. 1915, 12 L.Ed.2d 1044 (1964). On the issue of willfulness the prompt correction of errors by filing amended returns and by making tax payments is relevant. See Berkovitz v. United States, 213 F. 2d 468, 472 (5th Cir. 1954) and Heindel v. U…
• The Menominee Tribe OF Indians v. The United States, 388 F.2d 998 (Ct. Cl. 1967)
  …Alaska Pacific Fisheries v. United States, 248 U.S. 78, 39 S.Ct. 40, 63 L.Ed. 138 (1918). The Supreme Court of Wisconsin in passing on the identical question before us in Wisconsin v. Sanapaw, 21 Wis.2d 377, 124 N.W. 2d 41, 44 (1963), cert, denied, 377 U.S. 991, 84 S.Ct. 1911, 12 L.Ed.2d 1044 (1964), rehearing denied, 379 U.S. 871, 85 S.Ct. 17, 13 L.Ed.2d 78, said that if the 1854 treaty provision which ceded these lands to the Menominees “to be held as Indians lands are held” was ambiguous as to whether o…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Klamath AND Modoc Tribes and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians v. Maison, 338 F.2d 620 (9th Cir. 1964)
  …United States pursuant to § 564w. The holding of the District Court was that by virtue of the Termination Act this right was lost. We agree. The same issue was presented in State v. Sanapaw (1963) 21 Wis.2d 377, 124 N.W. 2d 41, cert. denied (1964) 377 U.S. 991, 84 S.Ct. 1911, 12 L.Ed.2d 1044. That case dealt with the Act terminating the Menominee Tribe 2 upon substantially the same terms as those of the Act before us. There the Court referred to House Concurrent Resolution 108, 83d Congress, 1st Session,…