25 U.S.C. § 564b

Omitted

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

[omitted]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1971–2012 · leading case: Klamath Tribe Claims Comm. v. United States, 97 Fed. Cl. 203 (Fed. Cl. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Klamath Tribe Claims Comm. v. United States, 97 Fed. Cl. 203 (Fed. Cl. 2011). “See 1954 Act § 3 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 564b). Upon publication of the final roll, the Act directed that "the rights or beneficial interests in tribal property of each person whose name appears on the roll shall constitute personal property.”

Kimball v. Callahan, 590 F.2d 768 (9th Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “25 U.S.C. § 564b. Each person whose name appeared on the final roll had to elect either to withdraw from the tribe and receive the money value of his interest in tribal property or to remain in the tribe and participate in a nongovernmental tribal management plan.”

Charles E. Kimball v. John D. Callahan, 493 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1974). “25 U.S.C. § 564b. Under the Act, each person whose name appeared on this tribal roll had to elect whether to withdraw from the tribe and receive the money value of his interest in tribal property or to remain in the tribe and participate in a nongovernmental tribal management…”

Klamath Tribe Claims Comm. v. United States, 106 Fed. Cl. 87 (Fed. Cl. 2012). “See 1954 Act § 3 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 564b). Upon publication of the final roll, the Act directed that "the rights or beneficial interests in tribal property of each person whose name appears on the roll shall constitute personal property.”

Klamath & Modoc Tribes & Yahooskin Band of Indians v. The United States. Elva G. Anderson v. The United States, 436 F.2d 1008 (Ct. Cl. 1971). “718 (1954), as amended, 25 U.S.C. § 564b (1964). Section 4 of the Act provided that, upon the publication of the final roll in the Federal Register, the rights or beneficial interest in the tribal property of each person whose name appeared on the roll, were to constitute…”

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.