Minnesota Co. v. National Co.

70 U.S. 332, 18 L. Ed. 42, 3 Wall. 332, 1865 U.S. LEXIS 717
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJanuary 18, 1866
StatusPublished
Cited by59 cases

This text of 70 U.S. 332 (Minnesota Co. v. National Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Minnesota Co. v. National Co., 70 U.S. 332, 18 L. Ed. 42, 3 Wall. 332, 1865 U.S. LEXIS 717 (1866).

Opinion

*334 The court having examined the case,

Mr. Justice GRIER

now delivered its opinion, and after stating the identity of the present case with the former, what was decided in the former and involved in this, and the history as above given, expressed himself in behalf of the Bench as follows:

This is another, and it is to be hoped the last attempt to persuade this court to reverse their decision in this case.

Where questions arise which affect titles to land it is of great importance to the public that when they are once decided they should no longer be considered open. Such decisions become rules of property, and many titles may be injuriously affected by their change. Legislatures may alter or change their laws, without injury, as they affect the future only; but where courts vacillate and overrule their own decisions on the construction of statutes affecting the title to real property, their decisions are retrospective and may affect titles purchased on the faith of their stability. Doubtful questions on subjects of this nature, when once decided, should be considered no longer doubtful or subject to change. Parties should not be encouraged to speculate on a change of the law when the administrators of it is changed. Courts ought not to be compelled to bear the infliction of repeated arguments by obstinate litigants, challenging the justice of their well-considered and solemn judgments.

The decision of the Supreme Court of Michigan, in conformity with the opinion of this court twice pronounced on the same title, is hereupon

Affirmed with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gp Vincent II v. the Estate of Edgar Beard
68 F.4th 508 (Ninth Circuit, 2023)
Pressly v. United States
Federal Claims, 2021
Oldham v. United States
Federal Claims, 2021
Bradley v. United States
Federal Claims, 2021
Ats Ford Drive Investment, LLC
Federal Claims, 2021
United States v. Nicholson
Ninth Circuit, 2009
United States v. Milner
583 F.3d 1174 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
Rambus Inc. v. Hynix Semiconductor Inc.
569 F. Supp. 2d 946 (N.D. California, 2008)
Petro-Hunt L.L.C. v. United States
179 F. Supp. 2d 669 (W.D. Louisiana, 2001)
North Star Terminal & Stevedore Co. v. State
857 P.2d 335 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1993)
Meadows v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc.
782 F. Supp. 1189 (E.D. Texas, 1991)
Peregoy v. Amoco Production Co.
742 F. Supp. 372 (E.D. Texas, 1990)
Ozyck v. D'Atri
538 A.2d 697 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1988)
Bear v. United States
810 F.2d 153 (Eighth Circuit, 1987)
Nevada v. United States
463 U.S. 110 (Supreme Court, 1983)
Arizona v. California
460 U.S. 605 (Supreme Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 U.S. 332, 18 L. Ed. 42, 3 Wall. 332, 1865 U.S. LEXIS 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minnesota-co-v-national-co-scotus-1866.