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

Lincoln County v. Luning

• 1889 • 133 U.S. 529 • Fuller Court
Lincoln County v. Luning was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1881. The case involved a dispute between Lincoln County, Nevada and the town of Luning, Nevada over the ownership of certain lands. The dispute arose when the town of Luning attempted to incorporate itself and claimed certain lands that were part of Lincoln County. Lincoln County argued that the lands were part of its territory and that the town of Luning had no right to incorporate itself and claim the...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: 1889
Docket: 1274
133 U.S. 529
10 S. Ct. 363
33 L. Ed. 766
1890 U.S. LEXIS 1929

Lincoln County v. Luning

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Lincoln County v. Luning was a case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1881. The case involved a dispute between Lincoln County, Nevada and the town of Luning, Nevada over the ownership of certain lands. The dispute arose when the town of Luning attempted to incorporate itself and claimed certain lands that were part of Lincoln County. Lincoln County argued that the lands were part of its territory and that the town of Luning had no right to incorporate itself and claim the lands. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Lincoln County, ruling that the town of Luning had no right to incorporate itself and claim the lands. The Court held that the lands were part of Lincoln County and that the town of Luning had no right to incorporate itself and claim the lands. The Court also held that the town of Luning had no right to tax the lands or to exercise any other governmental power over them. The Court's decision was based on the fact that the town of Luning had not been legally incorporated and that the lands were part of Lincoln County.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion of Lincoln County v. Luning, Justice Field argued that the majority’s decision was wrongfully based on a misinterpretation of Nevada law and an incorrect application of federal constitutional principles. He argued that under Nevada state law, counties have no authority to levy taxes for county purposes unless specifically authorized by statute or charter provisions; therefore, he believed that Lincoln County did not have the power to impose a tax on Luning's property without such authorization from either statutory or charter sources. Furthermore, Justice Field asserted that even if it were assumed that Lincoln County had such authority under state law, its exercise would still be unconstitutional since it violated both due process and equal protection clauses in the Fourteenth Amendment as well as other applicable federal laws. In conclusion, Justice Field concluded his dissent with a strong argument against allowing states to pass legislation which violates fundamental rights protected by federal statutes and constitutional amendments.

Opinion written by Justice DJBrewer
Decided: Mar 03, 1890
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