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.
GLEASON v. WOOD, COUNTY TREASURER OF PITTSBURG COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, 1912 — 224 U.S. 679 · caselaw · US
Tax
GLEASON v. WOOD, COUNTY TREASURER OF PITTSBURG COUNTY, OKLAHOMA
224 U.S. 67956 L. Ed. 947·Supreme Court of the United States·1912
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
GLEASON v. WOOD, COUNTY TREASURER OF PITTSBURG COUNTY, OKLAHOMA.
ERROR to the supreme COURT OP THE state op OKLAHOMA.
No. 575.
Argued February 23, 1912.
Decided May 13, 1912.
Decided on authority of Choate v. Trapp, ante, p. 665.
28 Oklahoma, 502, reversed.
The facts, which involve the taxability of- Choctaw allotments in Oklahoma, aré stated in the opinion.
Mr. Willard L. Sturdevant and Mr. David C. McCurtain, with whom Mr. Edward P. Hill was bn the brief, for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. Charles West, Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma, for defendants in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Lamar]
Mr. Justice Lamar
delivered the opinion of the court.
The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs are Choctaws owning homesteads and surplus granted under the terms of the Atoka Agreement. Their applications to enjoin the officers of the State of Oklahoma from assessing their lands for taxation for the year 1909 was denied. All of the questions involved are disposed of by the decision in Choate v. Trapp, ante, p. 665. The judgment, therefore, is reversed and the case remanded with directions for further proceedings not inconsistent with that opinion.
Reversed.