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

Williams v. Paine

• 1897 • 169 U.S. 55 • Fuller Court
In the case of Williams v. Paine, 1897, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership in Florida. The plaintiff, Williams, claimed that he had purchased the land from an individual who had received it as part of a Spanish grant before Florida became part of the U.S., and therefore his claim was superior to any subsequent American claims on the property. However, defendant Paine argued that this original grant was invalid because it did not meet certain requirements set...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: 1897
Docket: 114
169 U.S. 55
18 S. Ct. 279
42 L. Ed. 658
1897 U.S. LEXIS 2133
Argued: Nov 29, 1896

Williams v. Paine

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Williams v. Paine, 1897, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership in Florida. The plaintiff, Williams, claimed that he had purchased the land from an individual who had received it as part of a Spanish grant before Florida became part of the U.S., and therefore his claim was superior to any subsequent American claims on the property. However, defendant Paine argued that this original grant was invalid because it did not meet certain requirements set by Congress for recognizing such grants when Florida joined America. The court ruled in favor of Paine; they found that while Spain could indeed give away its lands prior to ceding them to another power like America (and these gifts would generally be respected), there were specific conditions attached to this particular transfer which made it voidable at American discretion after acquisition - namely if those receiving Spanish lands didn't cultivate or inhabit them within a certain time frame post-transfer.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Williams v. Paine, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring voters to pay a poll tax was fundamentally unjust and violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. He contended that this law effectively disenfranchised poor citizens, particularly African Americans in Southern states, by making their right to vote contingent upon their ability to pay. This, he argued, created an unequal system where wealth determined one's political power and influence. Furthermore, he believed it contradicted previous rulings which established voting as a fundamental right protected by equal protection laws under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Opinion written by Justice RWPeckham
Decided: Jan 10, 1897
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