Perrin v. United States, 171 U.S. 292 (1969)

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

Syllabus

Camou v. United States, ante, 171 U. S. 277, followed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

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.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.