25 U.S.C. § 331

Repealed. Pub. L. 106–462, title I, § 106(a)(1), Nov. 7, 2000, 114 Stat. 2007

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 25 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 265 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1927–2025 · leading case: United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535 (1980).
United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535 (1980). · cites it 8× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. § 331 et seq., the Government had allotted all of the Reservation's land in trust *537 to individual Indians.”
United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, 537 U.S. 465 (2003). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. § 331 et seq. (1976 ed.) (§§ 331-333 repealed 2000), providing that "the United States does and will hold the land thus allotted .”
United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206 (1983). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. § 331 et seq. [5] See also the Quinault Allotment Act *209 of Mar.”
Globe Indem. Co. v. Bruce, 81 F.2d 143 (10th Cir. 1935). · cites it 16× “1250 ), and section 1 of the Act of February 27, 1925 ( 25 U.S.C.A. § 331 note). If the lands, trust funds, and mineral interests are subject to the jurisdiction of the county courts of Oklahoma, it would seem that the quarterly payments arising therefrom would be subject to…”
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. § 331 et seq., and the Crow Allotment Act of 1920, 41 Stat.”
Plains Com. Bank v. Long Fam. Land & Cattle Co., 554 U.S. 316 (2008). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. §331 et seq., there are millions of acres of non-Indian fee land located within the contiguous borders of Indian tribes.”
Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 608 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2010). · cites it 10× “2573, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 331 Note. The law provides for federal and tribal criminal jurisdiction over offenses committed involving Indians "anywhere within the exterior boundaries of any grant from a prior sovereign, as confirmed by Congress or the Court of Private Land…”
United States v. Navajo Nation, 537 U.S. 488 (2003). · cites it 2× “) (§§ 331-333 repealed 2000), authorized an award of money damages against the United *504 States for alleged mismanagement of forests located on lands allotted to tribal members. The GAA authorized the President of the United States to allot agricultural or grazing land to…”
Atkinson Trading Co. v. Shirley, 532 U.S. 645 (2001). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. § 331 et seq., which authorized the issuance of patents in fee to individual Indian allottees who, after holding the patent for 25 years, could then transfer the land to non-Indians.”
Washington v. Confederated Bands & Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation, 439 U.S. 463 (1979). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. § 331 , popularly known as the Dawes Act, a philosophy which had been rejected with the passage of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, 48 Stat.”
Squire v. Capoeman, 351 U.S. 1 (1956). · cites it 4× “[2] 25 U. S. C. § 331 . [3] Id., § 348. [4] Ibid.”
United States v. Mottaz, 476 U.S. 834 (1986). · cites it 2× “388 , as amended, 25 U. S. C. §331 et seq. (1982 ed. and Supp.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.