Daniel Webster, Individually & as the Pers. Rep. of the Est. of Laurie Webster, Deceased v. United States, 22 F.3d 221 (9th Cir. 1994). · Go Syfert
Search
Daniel Webster, Individually & as the Pers. Rep. of the Est. of Laurie Webster, Deceased v. United States, 22 F.3d 221 (9th Cir. 1994). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Utah v. United States Department of the Interior (utd, 1999-04-09)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Utah v. United States Department of the Interior
D. Utah · 1999 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Webster v. United States, 823 F.Supp. 1544, 1550 (D.Mont.1992), aff'd. 22 F.3d 221 (9th Cir.1994); Hawley Lake Homeowners’ Ass’n v. Deputy Assistant Secretary, 13 IBIA 276, 288-89 (1985) (explaining that purpose of Secretary’s approval is to ensure that Indians are not improvident in dealings concerning their trust property and that Indians are not taken advantage of in such transactions).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Daniel Webster, Individually and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Laurie Webster, Deceased
v.
United States
92-36847.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Apr 19, 1994.
22 F.3d 221
94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2704
1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 7849
Published

22 F.3d 221

Daniel WEBSTER, Individually and as the Personal
Representative of the Estate of Laurie Webster,
deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-36847.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted March 10, 1994.
Decided April 19, 1994.

Edward K. Duckworth, Ronan, MT, for plaintiff-appellant.

Christine N. Kohl, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana, No. CV-89-0112-CCL; Charles C. Lovell, District Judge, Presiding.

Before: HUG, HALL, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

1

We affirm the district court on the basis of its well-reasoned opinion set forth in Webster v. United States, 823 F.Supp. 1544 (D.Mont.1992).