TIGER v. NOLEN

TIGER v. NOLEN
1920 OK 203
190 P. 263
78 Okla. 250
Case Number: 9680
Decided: 05/04/1920
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

TIGER et al.
v.
NOLEN et al.

Syllabus

¶0 Indians--Inherited Lands--Partition--Jurisdiction.
On July 6, 1909, the district courts of this state had jurisdiction of an action to partition inherited lands of mixed-blood Indians, including minors, and were authorized to decree a sale of such lands if found to be incapable of partition by the commissioners appointed by said courts.

Error from District Court, Hughes County; Geo. C. Crump, Judge.

Action by Ewnah J. Tiger and another against James M. Nolen and another. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

Diamond & Sherrow, for plaintiffs in error.
Skinner & Bailey, for defendants in error.

JOHNSON, J.

¶1 It was stipulated in this case as follows:

"The defendants in error filed a demurrer to the petition of the plaintiffs in error, and upon said demurrer coming on for hearing, the parties having agreed in open court that the sole and only question of law to be determined by the court was whether or not the district court could partition the land of a full-blood Indian inherited by a seven eighths-blood minor."

¶2 This stipulation eliminates from the case everything, as stated, except the sole question of law, "Whether or not the district court of this state could partition the land of a full-blood Indian inherited by a seven-eighths-blood minor." This court has recently answered that question in the affirmative in the case of Seth Salmon et al. v. Miley Johnson, 78 Okla. 182, 189 P. 537, in an opinion by Mr. Justice Rainey, decided at the present term (April 6, 1920).

¶3 The question of law decided in said cause is controlling in the instant case, being the identical question herein involved.

¶4 Under the rule of law announced in cause No. 9717, and the authorities there cited, it is ordered that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.