25 U.S.C. § 564d
Omitted
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1971–1996 · leading case: United States v. Felter, 546 F. Supp. 1002 (D. Utah 1982).
United States v. Felter, 546 F. Supp. 1002 (D. Utah 1982). “The Klamath Termination Act allowed members the option of withdrawing from tribal membership and provided that one who withdrew would “have his interest in tribal property converted into money and paid to him,” 25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2), and would cease to be a member of the tribe,…”
Charles E. Kimball v. John D. Callahan, 493 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1974). “25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2). 1 In order to pay the withdrawing members of the tribe, part of the original tribal property was sold, the greater part being taken by the United States.”
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. § 564d(a) (2) (1964). 4 . Ch. 732, § 6(b), 68 Stat.”
Ute Distrib. Corp. v. Sec'y of the Interior of the United States, 934 F. Supp. 1302 (D. Utah 1996). “250 (repealed 1973) (terminating the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin), but see 25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2) (giving individual members of Klamath Tribe option to withdraw from tribe and be paid for interest in tribal property), the Ute Partition Act did not terminate the federal Indian…”
State v. Bojorcas, 513 P.2d 813 (Or. Ct. App. 1973). “25 USC § 564d (a)(2). Four *541 hundred seventy three members of the tribe elected to remain in the tribe and their proportionate share of tribal property was transferred to a bank as trustee for the remaining members.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 564d(a) — 1 case
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. § 564d(a) (2) (1964). 4 . Ch. 732, § 6(b), 68 Stat.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2) — 4 cases
United States v. Felter, 546 F. Supp. 1002 (D. Utah 1982). “The Klamath Termination Act allowed members the option of withdrawing from tribal membership and provided that one who withdrew would “have his interest in tribal property converted into money and paid to him,” 25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2), and would cease to be a member of the tribe,…”
Charles E. Kimball v. John D. Callahan, 493 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1974). “25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2). 1 In order to pay the withdrawing members of the tribe, part of the original tribal property was sold, the greater part being taken by the United States.”
Ute Distrib. Corp. v. Sec'y of the Interior of the United States, 934 F. Supp. 1302 (D. Utah 1996). “250 (repealed 1973) (terminating the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin), but see 25 U.S.C. § 564d(a)(2) (giving individual members of Klamath Tribe option to withdraw from tribe and be paid for interest in tribal property), the Ute Partition Act did not terminate the federal Indian…”
State v. Bojorcas, 513 P.2d 813 (Or. Ct. App. 1973). “25 USC § 564d (a)(2). Four *541 hundred seventy three members of the tribe elected to remain in the tribe and their proportionate share of tribal property was transferred to a bank as trustee for the remaining members.”
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.