This HTML5 document contains 134 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n21https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/978/1334/183911/
n8http://dbpedia.org/resource/File:
n17https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/718/1291/416667/
n24https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
n20https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/973/1133/386271/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n19https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/865/1444/102251/
n12http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n18https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/740/305/233944/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:South_Carolina_v._Catawba_Indian_Tribe,_Inc.
rdf:type
yago:Case107308889 yago:Abstraction100002137 dbo:LegalCase yago:Group100031264 dbo:UnitOfWork owl:Thing yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 dbo:Case yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase wikidata:Q2334719 yago:Happening107283608 yago:People107942152 yago:WikicatSiouanPeoples yago:Event100029378
rdfs:label
South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc.
rdfs:comment
South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc., 476 U.S. 498 (1986), is an important U.S. Supreme Court precedent for aboriginal title in the United States decided in the wake of County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State (Oneida II) (1985). Distinguishing Oneida II, the Court held that federal policy did not preclude the application of a state statute of limitations to the land claim of a tribe that had been terminated, such as the Catawba tribe.
foaf:name
South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc.
foaf:depiction
n12:John_Paul_Stevens,_SCOTUS_photo_portrait.jpg n12:Justice_Blackmun_Official.jpg
dcterms:subject
dbc:Aboriginal_title_case_law_in_the_United_States dbc:Siouan_peoples dbc:1986_in_South_Carolina dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:1986_in_United_States_case_law dbc:Legal_history_of_South_Carolina dbc:Native_American_history_of_South_Carolina dbc:Economy_of_South_Carolina dbc:South_Carolina_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Burger_Court
dbo:wikiPageID
30774481
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
986877739
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:John_Paul_Stevens dbr:Harry_Blackmun dbr:Mandamus n8:John_Paul_Stevens,_SCOTUS_photo_portrait.jpg dbr:South_Carolina_Supreme_Court dbr:Indian_termination_policy dbr:Tacking_(law) dbr:South_Carolina dbc:1986_in_South_Carolina dbr:Summary_judgement dbr:Royal_Proclamation_of_1763 dbr:En_banc dbr:Native_American_Rights_Fund dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:Treaty_of_Nation_Ford dbr:F.2d n8:Justice_Blackmun_Official.jpg dbr:Catawba_people dbr:Class_certification dbr:Recusal dbr:Treaty_of_Fort_Augusta dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_South_Carolina dbr:Bureau_of_Indian_Affairs dbc:Legal_history_of_South_Carolina dbr:County_of_Oneida_v._Oneida_Indian_Nation_of_New_York_State dbr:Aboriginal_title_in_the_United_States dbr:Omnibus_spending_bill dbr:L._Ed._2d dbc:1986_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Federal_common_law dbr:Memorandum_of_Understanding dbr:Indian_Land_Claims_Settlements dbr:Thurgood_Marshall dbr:4th_Cir. dbr:Rock_Hill,_South_Carolina dbr:Indian_Commerce_Clause dbr:Affidavit dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit dbr:Tolling_(law) dbc:Native_American_history_of_South_Carolina dbr:Nonintercourse_Act dbr:Sandra_Day_O'Connor dbr:Statute_of_limitations dbc:Economy_of_South_Carolina dbr:Adverse_possession dbr:Certiorari dbr:Joseph_Putnam_Willson dbr:United_States_Solicitor_General dbr:United_States_Court_of_Federal_Claims dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Pennsylvania dbr:Bill_Clinton dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Burger_Court dbc:Aboriginal_title_case_law_in_the_United_States dbc:South_Carolina_law dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fourth_Circuit dbr:Voice_vote dbr:Indian_Claims_Commission dbr:Federal_Power_Commission_v._Tuscarora_Indian_Nation dbc:Siouan_peoples dbr:Canon_of_construction
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n17: n18: n19: n20: n21:
owl:sameAs
yago-res:South_Carolina_v._Catawba_Indian_Tribe,_Inc. freebase:m.0gfhxw_ n24:4vbZz wikidata:Q7566723
dbp:subsequent
17280.0
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Further dbt:Smallcaps dbt:Aboriginal_title_in_the_United_States dbt:Native_American_rights dbt:Reflist dbt:Good_article dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Ussc
dbo:thumbnail
n12:John_Paul_Stevens,_SCOTUS_photo_portrait.jpg?width=300
dbp:dissent
Blackmun
dbp:docket
84
dbp:joindissent
Marshall, O'Connor
dbp:joinmajority
Burger, Brennan, White, Powell, Rehnquist
dbp:lawsapplied
Treaty of Fort Augusta; 25 U.S.C. §§ 931—938 ; Nonintercourse Act
dbp:parallelcitations
172800.0
dbp:prior
17280.0
dbp:uspage
498
dbp:usvol
476
dbp:arguedate
0001-12-12
dbp:argueyear
1985
dbp:decidedate
0001-06-02
dbp:decideyear
1986
dbp:fullname
South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc.
dbp:holding
State statutes of limitations apply to the land claims of terminated tribes
dbp:litigants
South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc.
dbp:majority
Stevens
dbo:abstract
South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc., 476 U.S. 498 (1986), is an important U.S. Supreme Court precedent for aboriginal title in the United States decided in the wake of County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State (Oneida II) (1985). Distinguishing Oneida II, the Court held that federal policy did not preclude the application of a state statute of limitations to the land claim of a tribe that had been terminated, such as the Catawba tribe. The Court remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to determine whether South Carolina's statute of limitations applied to the facts of the case. All together, the Fourth Circuit heard oral arguments in the case seven times, six of those times sitting en banc, i.e. all the judges on the Circuit rather than a panel of three (although the Circuit wrote only five published opinions). The Fourth Circuit determined that the limitations statute only barred the claim against those defendants that could satisfy the standards of adverse possession and upheld the trial court's denial of a defendant class certification. These rulings would have required the Catawbas to file individual lawsuits against the estimated 60,000 landowners in the area. The complaints were prepared and printed, but the parties reached a settlement before the date on which the Catawbas would have been required to file the individual complaints. Congress ratified the settlement, extinguishing all aboriginal title held by the Catawbas in exchange for $50,000,000—$32,000,000 paid by the federal government and $18,000,000 paid by the state.
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:South_Carolina_v._Catawba_Indian_Tribe,_Inc.?oldid=986877739&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
23405
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:South_Carolina_v._Catawba_Indian_Tribe,_Inc.