Bodkin v. Edwards

Citation65 L.Ed. 595,255 U.S. 221,41 S.Ct. 268
Decision Date28 February 1921
Docket NumberNo. 495,495
PartiesBODKIN v. EDWARDS
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Mr. Samuel Herrick, of Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Mr. Justice VAN DEVANTER delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a suit by Edwards to have Bodkin declared a trustee for him of the title to a quarter section of land in California. While the land was public and subject to entry under the homestead law, Edwards, a qualified applicant, made a homestead entry of it and afterwards submitted final proofs in due course. Bodkin instituted a contest against the entry and obtained its cancellation by the Land Department. The land officers then permitted Bodkin to make a homestead entry of the tract, afterwards allowed him to relinquish that entry and make others of the same tract under soldiers' additional rights of which he was the assignee, and finally patented the tract to him. During all these proceedings Edwards actively asserted the validity of his claim, and sought to interpose it as an obstacle to passing the title to Bodkin. This suit was brought shortly after the patents issued. Apparently Edwards himself drafted the bill. The District Court dismissed it without leave to amend, and he appealed. The Circuit Court of Appeals, while recognizing that the bill was somewhat inartificial, held that it contained allegations which, if true, disclosed a right to the relief sought. The decree of dismissal was accordingly reversed. Edwards v. Bodkin, 249 Fed. 562, 161 C. C. A. 488. When the case got back to the District Court the form of the bill was helped by amendments, but the substance remained substantially as before. Bodkin answered, and the issues were tried. The court found that the material allegations of the bill were true; that in the proceedings before the Land Department matters presented by Edwards which should have been considered were not considered, and that in consequence the title was passed to Bodkin when it should have gone to Edwards. A decree for the latter followed, and Bodkin appealed. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this decree, and in the course of its opinion said:

'A careful review of the testimony assures us that all material allegations of the bill of complaint have been substantiated.' 265 Fed. 621.

Bodkin then took a further appeal to this court, the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals not being final under section 128 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 1120)....

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Larson v. Domestic Foreign Commerce Corporation
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 27, 1949
  • Binette v. Sabo
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • March 10, 1998
  • Radio Corporation v. Radio Engineering Laboratories
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • August 29, 1932
    ...211, 44 S. Ct. 289, 68 L. Ed. 639; Brewer Co. v. United States, 260 U. S. 77, 86, 43 S. Ct. 60, 67 L. Ed. 140; Bodkin v. Edwards, 255 U. S. 221, 223, 41 S. Ct. 268, 65 L. Ed. 595; National Bank of Athens v. Shackelford, 239 U. S. 81, 82, 36 S. Ct. 17, 60 L. Ed. 158; Wright-Blodgett Co. v. U......
  • Norton v. Larney
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 5, 1925
    ...have reached the same conclusion upon a question of fact it will be accepted here unless clearly erroneous. Bodkin v. Edwards, 255 U. S. 221, 223, 41 S. Ct. 268, 65 L. Ed. 595; Baker v. Schofield, 243 U. S. 114, 118, 37 S. Ct. 333, 61 L. Ed. 626. An examination of the evidence not only fail......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT