Svor v. Morris

Background

A man settled on and farmed the disputed quarter of public land in 1888 claiming it under the homestead law, living there continuously, improving the land more than $2,000 and cultivating over 100 acres. A railroad’s indemnity selection filed in 1883 was finally rejected on October 23, 1891 for failing to meet required formalities. Six days later Russell Sage, as trustee and assignee of the railroad’s rights, filed a new indemnity selection claiming the land was vacant; that selection was approved in 1897 and later certified. The plaintiff later bought Sage’s title with full notice of the settler’s occupancy.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether the settler’s earlier residence and improvements gave him a superior right to the land compared with the later-approved indemnity selection. It held that the six-day interval after the first rejection left the land open, and the settler’s occupancy during that interval created a homestead right that attached before the second selection. The Secretary’s approval was based on a representation that the land was vacant and was made without hearing the settler, so the certification was wrongfully obtained and the holder must treat the title as held in trust for the settler.

Real world impact

The Court reversed the Minnesota judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The ruling protects people who lawfully settle and improve public land against later certifications obtained ex parte or on false vacancy claims, and it can require purchasers with notice to hold title in trust for prior occupants.