Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/171/292/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/171/292/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Perrin v. United States, 171 U.S. 292 (1898)
Perrin v. United States
No. 30
Argued March 16-17, 1898
Decided May 81, 1898
171 U.S. 292
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS
Syllabus
Camou v. United States, ante, 171 U. S. 277, followed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
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, 171 U. S. 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 right. 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.
