Moore v. Stone

Background

A private plaintiff sought to recover land that depended on an Interior Department order. The Secretary of the Interior had directed withdrawal from sale or entry under the preemption and homestead laws of the odd-numbered sections within the Northern Pacific Railroad Company’s indemnity limits, as shown by the railroad’s map of definite location. That order rested entirely on the filing and acceptance of the railroad’s map and was made before any selection based on ascertained losses of distinct tracts in the place limits. The plaintiff’s right to recover therefore turned on whether that withdrawal order was valid.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Act of July 2, 1864 authorized the Secretary to make such a withdrawal based only on a filed map. Relying on the reasons stated in Hewitt v. Schultz, the Court concluded the order was not authorized by the 1864 act. Because the order lacked legal authority, the Court treated it as invalid and affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of Washington.

Real world impact

The ruling leaves the state-court judgment in place and removes the Secretary’s withdrawal as a barrier to the plaintiff’s recovery. It restricts the Interior Department’s ability to rely solely on a railroad’s filed map to block private homestead or preemption entries in indemnity sections. Because the decision rests on the 1864 statute and the Court’s reasoning in Hewitt v. Schultz, its application is focused on similar railroad indemnity and map-based withdrawal situations.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White concurred in the result. Justices Bee and Shiras dissented.