Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Indian Law (2)
- 5th amendment (1)
- Arizona Law (1)
- Beneficial interest (1)
- Boundaries (1)
-
- Environmental Law (1)
- Fifth amendment (1)
- Gila River (1)
- Land (1)
- Landowner (1)
- Mineral (1)
- Mineral development (1)
- Mineral estate (1)
- Mineral lease (1)
- Mining (1)
- Murr v. Wisconsin (1)
- Native American Law (1)
- New Mexico Law (1)
- Ninth Circuit (1)
- Oklahoma (1)
- Osage (1)
- Osage Act (1)
- Osage Nation (1)
- Osage Wind (1)
- Private property (1)
- Property (1)
- Property Law (1)
- Surface estate (1)
- Takings (1)
- Takings clause (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Herr v. U. S. Forest Service, the Sixth Circuit ruled on whether the Forest Service could infringe on pre-existing private property rights held adjacent to a designated Wilderness Area. The Herrs purchased lakefront property adjacent to the Sylvania Wilderness in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan with the intention of using their littoral rights for recreational boating. The Sylvania Wilderness was created under the Michigan Wilderness Act in 1987, but the Act observed valid existing rights. The court found that the Herrs’ littoral rights were recognizable “valid existing rights.” Therefore, the Forest Service’s restriction of those rights was illegal.
United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack
United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approved leases to persons and entities who wish to conduct mineral development on its lands. After an energy-development company, Osage Wind, leased privately-owned surface lands within Tribal reservation boundaries and began to excavate minerals for purposes of constructing a wind farm, the United States brought suit on the Tribe’s behalf. In the ensuing litigation, the Osage Nation insisted that Osage Wind should have obtained a mineral lease from the Tribe before beginning its work. In its decision, the Tenth Circuit applied one of the Indian law …
United States V. Gila Valley Irrigation District, Ryan L. Hickey
United States V. Gila Valley Irrigation District, Ryan L. Hickey
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Attempts to alter water use agreements, especially those spanning back decades or even centuries, elicit intense scrutiny from water rights holders. In United States v. Gila Valley Irrigation Dist., the Ninth Circuit upheld application of a 1935 Decree apportioning water among various regional entities, including two Indian tribes, to bar a mineral company from transferring water rights between properties within the Gila River drainage.
Murr V. Wisconsin, Nathan A. Burke
Murr V. Wisconsin, Nathan A. Burke
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Murr v. Wisconsin, the Court redefined how to determine private property for a regulatory taking under the Fifth Amendment. Previously, courts have primarily relied on state property principles to determine the relevant unit of property for a regulatory takings claim. However, in this case, the Court adopted a three-factor standard to determine the landowner’s reasonable expectations regarding the treatment of their property. By relying on these factors rather than only on state laws, the Court created a litigation-specific definition of property that could potentially differ from state property boundaries. The three-factor standard may also give the government an …