Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Fields v. United States

• 1906 • 205 U.S. 292 • Fuller Court
In the 1906 case Fields v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning land ownership and mining rights in Alaska. The plaintiff, Fields, claimed that he had acquired certain lands under an act of Congress which allowed for coal mining operations. However, these claims were contested by other parties who argued that they held prior rights to mine these lands based on earlier laws enacted by Congress regarding gold and silver mines. The court decided in favor of the defendants...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Fuller Court
Term: 1906
Docket: 395
205 U.S. 292
27 S. Ct. 543
51 L. Ed. 807
1907 U.S. LEXIS 1397
Argued: Mar 12, 1907

Fields v. United States

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1906 case Fields v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning land ownership and mining rights in Alaska. The plaintiff, Fields, claimed that he had acquired certain lands under an act of Congress which allowed for coal mining operations. However, these claims were contested by other parties who argued that they held prior rights to mine these lands based on earlier laws enacted by Congress regarding gold and silver mines. The court decided in favor of the defendants (United States), stating that while Fields may have staked his claim first under one law allowing for coal mining operations, this did not supersede or invalidate previous claims made under different laws pertaining to gold and silver mines. Therefore, it was determined that those with pre-existing mineral rights could continue their activities without interference from subsequent claimants like Fields.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Fields v. United States, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant. The dissenting justices contended that any evidence procured in such a manner should be deemed inadmissible in court, as allowing its use would essentially condone illegal actions by law enforcement officials. They further asserted that this ruling could set a dangerous precedent, potentially leading to more widespread violations of citizens' constitutional rights under the guise of criminal investigations.

Opinion written by Justice DJBrewer
Decided: Apr 08, 1907
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms