LEITER MINERALS, INC. V. UNITED STATES, 352 U. S. 220 (1957)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 352 U. S. 220
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/352/220/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/352/220/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Leiter Minerals, Inc. v. United States, 352 U.S. 220 (1957)
Leiter Minerals, Inc. v. United States
No. 26
Argued November 6-7, 1956
Decided January 14, 1957
352 U.S. 220
Syllabus
Petitioner filed a petitory action in a Louisiana state court against respondent mineral lessees of the United States, seeking to have itself declared owner of the mineral rights under land owned by the United States, and an accounting for oil and other minerals removed by respondent lessees under their lease from the United States. Petitioner's claim was founded on a Louisiana statute which allegedly made "imprescriptible" a reservation of mineral rights in a deed to the United States by its predecessor in title. The United States then brought suit against petitioner and other interested parties in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana to quiet title in the mineral rights and for a preliminary injunction to restrain petitioner from prosecuting its action in the state court. The District Court issued the injunction, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Held:
1. 28 U.S.C. § 2283, which restricts the granting of injunctions by federal courts to stay proceedings in state courts, is inapplicable to stays sought by the United States. Pp. 352 U. S. 224-226.
2. In the circumstances of this case, the granting of the injunction was proper. United States v. Bank of New York Trust Co., 296 U. S. 463, distinguished. Pp. 352 U. S. 226-228.
3. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is modified to permit an interpretation of the state statute to be sought with every expedition in the state court. Pp. 352 U. S. 228-230.
224 F.2d 381 modified and affirmed.