Daniels v. Craddock, 237 U.S. 574 (1915)

U.S. Supreme Court

Daniels v. Craddock, 237 U.S. 574 (1915)

Daniels v. Craddock

No. 248

Argued April 21, 22, 1915

Decided June 1, 1915

237 U.S. 574

Syllabus

Decided on authority of Daniels v. Wagner, ante, p. 237 U. S. 547.

205 F. 235 reversed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

U.S. Supreme Court

Daniels v. Craddock, 237 U.S. 574 (1915)

Daniels v. Craddock

No. 248

Argued April 21, 22, 1915

Decided June 1, 1915

237 U.S. 574

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Syllabus

Decided on authority of Daniels v. Wagner, ante, p. 237 U. S. 547.

205 F. 235 reversed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

Included among the fifteen cases which were argued by the appellant in a single brief, this case was separately argued by the appellees. The brief pressed upon our attention seven propositions, all of which we are of opinion

Page 237 U. S. 575

are disposed of by the views announced in Daniels v. Wagner, ante, p. 237 U. S. 547 (No. 239), since the propositions all in substance either conflict with the finding of the Secretary of the Interior as to the performance by the lieu applicants of every essential requirement to entitle them to make the entry, or directly or indirectly assert the possession by the Land Department at least as to the lieu entries, of the discretionary power which was asserted and recognized by the court below. It follows, therefore that, for the reasons here stated and those expressed in No. 239, the judgment must be, and it is, reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this and the opinion in Daniels v. Wagner, ante, p. 237 U. S. 547.

Reversed.

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.