Edward Rutledge Timber Co. v. Farrell

Background

A man who claimed rights under the homestead laws (Delany) sued in the United States District Court in Idaho. He asked the court to require others to hold land that had been patented to a railway company as trustee for him. He argued the patent should not have issued because (1) the land was unsurveyed and not described with reasonable certainty when the railway made its selection under the Act of March 2, 1899, and (2) the land lay within an area for which the State of Idaho had applied for a survey under the Act of August 18, 1894. The District Court rejected both points and dismissed the suit. The Court of Appeals disagreed on the first point but did not address the second.

Reasoning

The Court reviewed the Land Department’s finding that the railway’s description was sufficiently certain. It agreed with the District Court’s analysis of the statutes and prior decisions that the mere filing of an application to have the land surveyed did not withdraw the land from the public domain so as to void the railway’s selection. The opinion explains that, at most, the state’s application gave an option to select, which in this case was never exercised for the disputed land. For those reasons, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the District Court’s decree.

Real world impact

The ruling leaves the railway’s patent in place and denies the homestead claimant the land. It upholds the Land Department’s authority to accept the railway’s selection when descriptions are held reasonably certain. The decision shows that filing for a survey by a State does not automatically prevent private selections unless further action is taken. No appeal was taken from the Land Department’s refusal to consider Idaho’s overbroad designation.