Home/Supreme Court of Oklahoma/Padgett v. Trent

Padgett v. Trent

1916 OK 767, 160 P. 38, 61 Okla. 49, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 799
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedSeptember 12, 1916
Docket4175
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1916 OK 767 (Padgett v. Trent) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Padgett v. Trent, 1916 OK 767, 160 P. 38, 61 Okla. 49, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 799 (Okla. 1916).

Opinion

Opinion by

RITTENHOUSE, O.

This action involves the title to block 209 in tbe city of Muskogee, Okla., alleged to be of the value of $35,000. The tribal deed or patent for this block was issued to tbe trustees of tbe school district of Muskogee, Ind. T. The petition, to which a demurrer was sustained, contains 98 closely typewritten pages, setting out the facts, the text of the various laws of congress and Arkansas affecting the title to the block in controversy, tbe correspondeijce between tbe government officials, and all tbe pleadings and evidence before the Creek Town-Site Commission and the Secretary of the Interior. and their decisions thereon relative to the application of plaintiff to have the block in controversy scheduled to him.

Tbe essential facts as alleged are:

That Jane Dolman, a Greek Indian by blood, was enrolled under the name of Elizabeth Jane Dolman, opposite No. 2932, as 51 years of age in 1898. That about the year 1882, in accordance with tbe tribal laws and customs^ she took possession of a tract of land, consisting of about 60 acres, then being an unoccupied portion of the Creek domain, inclosing the same with a wire fence and erecting a residence thereon, and from that time until the sale thereof continued to use, occupy, till, cultivate, and raise crops thereon. That all of said land was within the limits of the town site of Muskogee, as surveyed and platted by tbe first Muskogee Town-Site Commission. That block 209 constituted a portion of tbe tracf of land so enclosed. That the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railroad was constructed through what is now the city of Muskogee in 1872, and the tract of land so taken in possession by Jane Dolman was within three miles of said line of railroad. That the National Council of the Creek Nation enacted a tribal law (Perry-man’s Constitution and Laws of the Creek Nation 1890, sec. 1, art. 4, c. XII), which was as follows:

“All citizens of this nation having improvements or residences on the line of any railroad, within three miles distance of the same, on either side, and all citizens who may hereafter make improvements or build residences on the same shall have the exclusive right to a claim of one -square mile of land to each and every family.” 1

That Jane Dolman was in the exclusive possession of said tract of land, and the owner and holder of the improvements thereon on March 18, 1898, when the town of Muskogee was incorporated and said tract of land inclosed within its corporate limits. That on June 28, 1898 (chapter 517, 30 Stat. 495), when the Curtis Act became a law, she was in the exclusive possession and owner and holder of the improvements on said land. That section 14 of said act provided:

“That owners and holders of leases or improvements in any city or town shall be privileged to transfer the same.”

That on November 10, 1898, Jane Dolman, for a valuable consideration, sold the occupancy and right of possession to and improvements upon the land, now designated as block 209, to A. H. Sharum. which was evidenced by a written bill of sale, and Sharum went into possession thereof, remaining in possession until March 31, 1899, when he sold and delivered to J. E. Padgett, plaintiff herein, his occupancy and right of possession to and improvements upon said land, and that the said Padgett immediately entered upon and took possession of said land.

The plaintiff bases his claim of title upon that part of section 13 of Hie Original Allotment Agreement (chapter 676, 31 Stat. 861), which reads as follows.

“Also any person who had at the time of signing this agreement purchased any lot, *50 tract, or parcel of land from any person m legal possession at the time, shall have the right to purchase the lot embraced in same by paying one-half of the appraised value thereof, not, however, exceeding four acres.”

There were five different schedules made of the lot in controversy by the three successive town-site commissions, as follows:

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

Related

Baker, Hanna, Blake & Co. v. Bonaparte
1935 OK 728 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1916 OK 767, 160 P. 38, 61 Okla. 49, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 799, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/padgett-v-trent-okla-1916.