Curdy v. United States

Decision Date07 April 1924
Docket NumberNo. 135,135
PartiesMcCURDY, County Treasurer of Osage County, Okl., et al. v. UNITED STATES
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Mr. Elmer E. Grinstead, of Pawhuska, Okl., for appellants.

The Attorney General and Mr. S. W. Williams, of Washington, D. C., for the United States.

Mr. Justice BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.

The United States, as guardian and trustee for the Osage Indians, brought this suit against the county treasurer and taxing officers of Osage county, Okl., and others, to restrain collection of unpaid taxes, to cancel certain tax sale certificates, and to recover sums paid as taxes on land in that county, which had been allotted to members of the Osage Tribe. The District Court dismissed the cause. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decree, and remanded the cause, with instructions to grant the relief prayed.

The question is whether the allotted lands were subject to taxation for 1909. Under the state laws, land was taxable as of March 1 of that year. In 1883, these lands were purchased from the Cherokee Nation by the United States for the benefit of the Osage and Kansas Indians. Chapter 3572, 34 Stat. 539, approved June 28, 1906, known as the Osage Allotment Act, provided for the division of lands belonging to the Osage Tribe among its members. Section 2. Each member was entitled to make three selections, and was permitted to designate one as a homestead, which was required to be so designated in his certificate and deed, and it was provided that the homestead would be inalienable and nontaxable until otherwise provided by act of Congress. The other land allotted to each member was known as surplus land. Subdivision 4, § 2. The Secretary of the Interior, in his discretion and upon the petition of any adult member of the tribe, was empowered to issue to such member a certificate of competency, authorizing him to sell and convey any of the lands 'deeded him by reason of this act.' It was provided that:

'The surplus lands shall be nontaxable for the period of three years from the approval of this act, except where certificates of competency are issued or in case of the death of the allottee, unless otherwise provided by Congress.' Subdivision 7, § 2.

Further, that the lands of any deceased members should descend to his or her legal heirs according to the laws of Oklahoma, except in certain cases not here material (section 6), and that:

'All deeds * * * shall be executed by the principal chief for the Osages, but no such deeds shall be valid until approved by the Secretary of the Interior.' Section 8.

The allotments were completed and approved by the Secretary November 19, 1908. All allottees had died prior to that date. All of the lands taxed were allotted as surplus lands. Deeds were not signed by the principal chief until May and June, 1909, and they were not approved by the Secretary until July 30 of that year. None of the allottees received a certificate of competency.

Title was in the United States on the date as of which the assessment was made, and did not pass until the execution and delivery of the deeds. Section 8. The lands were not taxable while held in trust by the United States. United States v. Rickert, 188 U. S. 432, 23 Sup. Ct. 478, 47 L. Ed. 532; See also The Kansas Indians, 5...

To continue reading

Request your trial
40 cases
  • Ahrensfeld v. Stephens, 75--1158
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • December 23, 1975
    ... ... Donald STEPHENS et al., Defendants-Appellees ... No. 75--1158 ... United States Court of Appeals, ... Seventh Circuit ... Argued Sept. 15, 1975 ... Decided Dec. 23, 1975 ... ...
  • Chase v. McMasters
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • April 5, 1978
    ...as federal instrumentalities, United States v. Rickert, 188 U.S. 432, 23 S.Ct. 478, 47 L.Ed. 532 (1903); McCurdy v. United States, 264 U.S. 484, 44 S.Ct. 345, 68 L.Ed. 801 (1924), and that federal jurisdiction over tribal trust lands was exclusive and precluded assertion of state or local c......
  • Richardson v. Midwest Refining Co.
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • September 11, 1928
    ... ... W. Ferguson, for appellant ... Defendant's ... amended answer states no defense; plaintiff's claims are ... based on the Stockraising Homestead Act, U.S.C. S. 4587, ... M., sets out that on March 1, 1917, one Frank J ... Smith made application through the United States Land Office ... at Douglas, Wyoming, to file on this land as a stock-raising ... ...
  • C.S. v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • May 10, 2021
    ...employed to salvage claims that would otherwise be unjustly barred by a limitations provision. See McCurdy v. United States, 264 U.S. 484, 487, 44 S.Ct. 345, 346, 68 L.Ed. 801 (1924) ; Moore v. Baker, 989 F.2d 1129, 1131 (11th Cir. 1993). Under Rule 15, a claim in an amended complaint relat......
  • 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