Skip to content


Pigeon Vs. Buck - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number237 U.S. 386
AppellantPigeon
RespondentBuck
Excerpt:
pigeon v. buck - 237 u.s. 386 (1915) u.s. supreme court pigeon v. buck, 237 u.s. 386 (1915) pigeon v. buck no. 199 argued march 12, 15, 1915 decided april 26, 1915 no. 275 submitted march 15, 1915 decided april 26, 1915 237 u.s. 386 error to the supreme court of the state of oklahoma syllabus mcdougal v. mckay, ante, p. 237 u. s. 372 , followed to the effect that an allotment made to a full blooded creek indian is, for purposes of descent and distribution, to be considered, not as a new acquisition, but as an ancestral estate and passes as such under chapter 49 of mansfield's digest of the laws of arkansas. the same ruling also applies to an allotment of a full-blooded chickasaw.....
Judgment:
Pigeon v. Buck - 237 U.S. 386 (1915)
U.S. Supreme Court Pigeon v. Buck, 237 U.S. 386 (1915)

Pigeon v. Buck

No. 199

Argued March 12, 15, 1915

Decided April 26, 1915

No. 275

Submitted March 15, 1915

Decided April 26, 1915

237 U.S. 386

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Syllabus

McDougal v. McKay, ante, p. 237 U. S. 372 , followed to the effect that an allotment made to a full blooded Creek Indian is, for purposes of descent and distribution, to be considered, not as a new acquisition, but as an ancestral estate and passes as such under Chapter 49 of Mansfield's Digest of the Laws of Arkansas.

The same ruling also applies to an allotment of a full-blooded Chickasaw Indian.

3 Okl. 37 and 101 affirmed.

The facts, which are similar to those involved in the preceding case, are stated in the opinion.

Page 237 U. S. 387

MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

The opinion in McDougal v. McKay, announced today, ante, p. 237 U. S. 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 Okl. 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, 33 Stat. 573, c. 1824, § 2, the devolution depended upon Chapter 49, Mansfield's Digest, Statutes of Arkansas. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma (38 Okl. 376) adjudged the estate must be treated as ancestral, and that half passed to the paternal relatives and half to the maternal one.

Affirmed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //