Bessie Brown English v. Richardson

CourtU.S. Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtLamar
CitationBessie Brown English v. Richardson, 224 U.S. 680, 32 S.Ct. 571, 56 L.Ed. 949 (1912)
Decision Date13 May 1912
Docket NumberNo. 559,559
PartiesBESSIE BROWN ENGLISH, Piff. in Err., v. H. T. RICHARDSON, County Treasurer of Tulsa County

Messrs. W. L. Sturdevant and Grant Foreman for plaintiff in error.

Mr. M. L. Mott for the Creek Nation.

Mr. Charles West, Attorney General of Oklahoma, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Lamar delivered the opinion of the court:

The plaintiff holds a patent dated December 12, 1902. It was issued to her as a member of the Creek Nation when the tribal lands were divided in pursuance of the same general policy as that discussed in Choate v. Trapp, just decided. [224 U. S. 665, 56 L. ed. ——, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 565.] There were, however, a few differences. The tax exemption covered only the homestead of 40 acres and there was a restriction on alienability for twenty-one years. The patent, instead of being 'framed in conformity with the agreement,' as in the case of the Choctaws and Chickasaws, bore on its face a provision that the land should be nontaxable; the language of the agreement incorporated in the act of Congress being that 'each citizen shall select from his allotment 40 acres of land . . . as a homestead, which shall be and remain nontaxable, inalienable, and free from any encumbrance whatever for twenty-one years from the date of the deed...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
49 cases
  • Gully v. Wilmut Gas & Oil Co
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • February 10, 1936
    ...L.Ed. 303, 7 Cranch 164, 165; Shoats v. Trapp, 224 U.S. 675, 56 L.Ed. 946; Gleason v. Wood, 244 U.S. 679, 56 L.Ed. 947; English v. Richardson, 224 U.S. 680, 56 L.Ed. 949; Grand Canyon R. Co. v. Treat, 95 P. 189; Canal & Banking Co. v. State Board, 71 A. 329. Initially, the Legislature posse......
  • Bruner v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Oklahoma
    • August 16, 2004
    ...this attempt to curtail the exemption occurred before the expiration of the established period of time. In English v. Richardson, 224 U.S. 680, 32 S.Ct. 571, 56 L.Ed. 949 (1912), decided the same day as Choate, a Creek plaintiff was granted a tax exemption following the reasoning in Choate.......
  • In re Gross Production Tax of Wolverine Oil Co.
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • October 12, 1915
    ... ... 363] ...          Ames, ... Chambers, Lowe & Richardson, of Oklahoma City, for Wolverine ... Oil Company ... Wood, 224 U.S. 679, 32 S.Ct ... 571, 56 L.Ed. 947; English v. Richardson, 224 U.S ... 680, 32 S.Ct. 571, 56 L.Ed. 949. It could ... ...
  • Schock v. Sweet
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • December 15, 1914
    ... ... Trapp, 224 U.S. 665, 32 S.Ct. 565, 56 ... L.Ed. 941, English v. Richardson, 224 U.S. 680, 32 ... S.Ct. 571, 56 L.Ed. 949, and State ... ...
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Suspecting the states: Supreme Court review of state-court state-law judgments.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 101 No. 1, October 2002
    • October 1, 2002
    ...R.R. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 187 S.W. 827 (Mo. 1916). (181.) 253 U.S. 17 (1920). (182.) Choate v. Trapp, 224 U.S. 665 (1912); English v. Richardson, 224 U.S. 680 (1912); Gleason v. Wood, 224 U.S. 679 (1912); see also Love County, 253 U.S. at 20. The Supreme Court held that an 1898 Act of Cong......