Pigeon v. Buck

Supreme Court

Pigeon v. Buck

237 U.S. 386, 35 S. Ct. 608, 59 L. Ed. 1007, 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1343

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 26, 1915

DocketNos. 199 and 275

StatusPublished

Cited by24 cases

This text of 237 U.S. 386 (Pigeon v. Buck) 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

Pigeon v. Buck, 237 U.S. 386, 35 S. Ct. 608, 59 L. Ed. 1007, 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1343 (1915).

Pincite

Opinion

*387 Mr. Justice McReynolds

delivered the opinion of the court.

The opinion in McDougal v. McKay, announced today, ante, p. 372, considers and decides the questions involved in these writs of error and necessitates affirmation of the judgments of the Supreme Court of Oklahoma in both causes.

In No. 199, Pigeon v. Buck, all parties were enrolled full-blooded Creek Indians. The allottee, Lowiney Harjo, having received a patent to certain land, died July 12, 1905, intestate, without descendants, leaving father, mother, brothers, sister and her husband. Thereafter the father and mother — John and Mate Pigeon — claiming the land must be treated as an ancestral estate which passed to them in fee, conveyed their interest therein to Buck. The brothers and sister, maintaining that it was a new acquisition in the deceased and the father and mother took only a life estate with remainder in themselves, instituted suit to have their rights declared. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma (38 Oklahoma, 101) held the estate was ancestral and went half to the father and half to the mother according to the applicable provisions of chapter 49, Mansfield’s Digest, Statutes of 'Arkansas.

In No. 275, Roberts v. Underwood, the land in question was allotted and patented to a full-blooded Chickasaw Indian who thereafter and in 1907 died intestate, leaving no descendants. A contest arose between his paternal relatives, Underwood and Byrd, and a maternal relative, Roberts, concerning their respective interests in the property. Under the Act of April 28,1904, § 2, c. 1824, 33 Stat. 573, the devolution depended upon chapter 49, Mansfield’s Digest, Statutes of Arkansas. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma (38 Oklahoma, 376) adjudged the estate must be treated as ancestral and that half passed to the paternal relatives and half to the maternal one.

Affirmed.

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

*387 Mr. Justice McReynolds

delivered the opinion of the court.

The opinion in McDougal v. McKay, announced today, ante, p. 372, considers and decides the questions involved in these writs of error and necessitates affirmation of the judgments of the Supreme Court of Oklahoma in both causes.

In No. 199, Pigeon v. Buck, all parties were enrolled full-blooded Creek Indians. The allottee, Lowiney Harjo, having received a patent to certain land, died July 12, 1905, intestate, without descendants, leaving father, mother, brothers, sister and her husband. Thereafter the father and mother — John and Mate Pigeon — claiming the land must be treated as an ancestral estate which passed to them in fee, conveyed their interest therein to Buck. The brothers and sister, maintaining that it was a new acquisition in the deceased and the father and mother took only a life estate with remainder in themselves, instituted suit to have their rights declared. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma (38 Oklahoma, 101) held the estate was ancestral and went half to the father and half to the mother according to the applicable provisions of chapter 49, Mansfield’s Digest, Statutes of 'Arkansas.

In No. 275, Roberts v. Underwood, the land in question was allotted and patented to a full-blooded Chickasaw Indian who thereafter and in 1907 died intestate, leaving no descendants. A contest arose between his paternal relatives, Underwood and Byrd, and a maternal relative, Roberts, concerning their respective interests in the property. Under the Act of April 28,1904, § 2, c. 1824, 33 Stat. 573, the devolution depended upon chapter 49, Mansfield’s Digest, Statutes of Arkansas. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma (38 Oklahoma, 376) adjudged the estate must be treated as ancestral and that half passed to the paternal relatives and half to the maternal one.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 U.S. 386, 35 S. Ct. 608, 59 L. Ed. 1007, 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pigeon-v-buck-scotus-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack