43 U.S.C. § 141
Repealed. Pub. L. 94–579, title VII, § 704(a), Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2792
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36
cases, 1930–1999 · leading case: Lujan v. Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n, 497 U.S. 871 (1990).
Lujan v. Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n, 497 U.S. 871 (1990). “847 , 43 U. S. C. § 141 (1970 ed.), repealed, 90 Stat.”
State v. Alaska Land Title Ass'n, 667 P.2d 714 (Alaska 1983). “5516 (1943), under which the President of the United States delegated his authority to the Secretary of the Interior under 43 U.S.C. § 141 , ch. 421, § 1, 36 Stat. 847 (1910), repealed by Pub.”
United States v. City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners, 656 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1982). “In particular, the water court held *13 that: (1) no water had been reserved for maintaining minimum instream flows in national forests; (2) no water had been reserved for instream flows for recreational boating purposes at Dinosaur National Monument; (3) reserved rights for…”
Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1 (1965). ““[T]he President may, at any time in his discretion, temporarily withdraw from settlement, location, sale, or entry any of the public lands of the United States including the District of Alaska . . . It is true that the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit…”
James W. Haley v. Fred A. Seaton, Sec'y of the Interior, 281 F.2d 620 (D.C. Cir. 1960). “847 , 43 U.S.C.A. §§ 141 , 142, 143 and 16 U.S.”
Sekaquaptewa v. MacDonald, 448 F. Supp. 1183 (D. Ariz. 1978). “The Pickett Act expressly authorized the President to “temporarily withdraw from settlement, location, sale, or entry any of the public lands .”
Brennan v. Udall, 251 F. Supp. 12 (D. Colo. 1966). “Secondly, that the Secretary of Interior lacked authority to make any kind of reservation under the 1914 Act in Baxter’s patent; that the Secretary lacked power to make any kind of a classification in 1916 inasmuch as Baxter had already entered the land and occupied it under the…”
United States v. Pan-Am. Petroleum Co., 55 F.2d 753 (9th Cir. 1932). “” 43 USCA § 141. This aet further protected the rights of any locator who, at the date of any order of withdrawal, was a bona fide occupant or claimant of oil lands, and who, at such date, was in diligent prosecution of work leading to the discovery of oil, so long as such…”
Amos A. Hopkins (Dukes) v. United States, 414 F.2d 464 (9th Cir. 1969). “847 , 43 U.S.C. § 141 . The statute provides that “such withdrawals or reservations shall remain in force until revoked by him or by an Act of Congress.”
United States v. State, 959 P.2d 449 (Idaho 1998). “The Pickett Act, 43 U.S.C. § 141 , provided: [T]he President may, at any time in his discretion, temporarily withdraw from settlement, location, sale, or entry any of the public lands of the United States, including the District of Alaska, and reserve the *452 same for…”
Resource Investments v. State, Dep't of Transp. & Pub. Facilities, 687 P.2d 280 (Alaska 1984). “In ALTA all parties, including the State, agreed that PLO 601 was based on Execu *282 tive Order 9337 1 which in turn was based on the Pickett Act, 43 U.S.C. § 141 et seq. Id. at 724. In the present case, the State agrees that PLO 601 is based on Executive Order 9337, but argues…”
Rowe v. United States, 464 F. Supp. 1060 (D. Alaska 1979). “43 U.S.C. § 141 . 75 . Quoted with approval in Duesing v.”
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.