Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
GARFIELD, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. ALLISON, 1908 — 211 U.S. 264 · caselaw · US
IP
GARFIELD, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. ALLISON
211 U.S. 26453 L. Ed. 176·Supreme Court of the United States·1908
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
GARFIELD, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. ALLISON.
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.
Nos. 249, 250.
Argued October 15, 18, 1908.
Decided November 30, 1908.
Decided on the authority of Garfield v. Goldsby, ante, p. 249.
The facts are practically the same as those stated in th opinion of the preceding case.
The Attorney General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General Fowler, with whom Mr. William B. Harr was on the brief, for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Charles H. Merillat, with whom Mr. Charles J. Happier and Mr. James K. Jones were on the brief, for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Day]
Mr. Justice Day
delivered the opinion of the court.
These cases were argued and submitted with the Goldsby Case, No. 248, just decided. In the case of George A. Allison, a patent had been issued for his lands and duly recorded. In the case of Ida Allison, an allotment certificate had been issued.
The relators are Cherokees, but the legislation herein involved is not different from that governing allotments to members of the Chickasaw Nation.
The Allisons made application to the commission for admission to citizenship under-the act of June 10, 1896. Their applications were denied and no appeal taken. Afterwards a decision by the commission, granting the application of the Allisons for enrollment as citizens by blood, was affirmed by the Department of the Interior as of April 16, 1904. Their names were summarily stricken from the rolls by the department’s order of March 4, 1907. The cases are controlled by the decision in Goldsby’s Case.
Judgments affirmed.