Overview
Case summary
The Court of Claims affirmed an award of $1,920 to the claimant for property destroyed by Cheyenne and Kiowa Indians. The United States had elected to reopen the Secretary of the Interior's initial allowance of the claim under the Indian Depredation Act of 1891 but failed to introduce new evidence, relying instead on the original record. The court held that the party electing to reopen the case bears the burden of proof to show the Secretary's award was erroneous and that the court will not simply re-evaluate conflicting evidence to reach a different result.
Abstract
The court affirmed an award to the claimant for property destroyed by Indians, as the United States elected to reopen the Secretary of the Interior's initial allowance under the Indian Depredation Act but failed to introduce new evidence and did not meet its burden to prove the award erroneous. The court held that merely relying on the original record and re-evaluating conflicting evidence does not justify overturning the Secretary's decision. The evidence was deemed sufficient to sustain the award.
Procedural posture
Legal categories
Case record
Issues & holdings
De novo (as a new trial under the Act)
The burden of proof is on the party electing to reopen the case to show the Secretary's award is wrong; the government failed to meet this burden.
Holdings of the court
Timeline
No timeline recorded.
Facts & evidence
Key facts
5 facts- Claimant presented a claim for property destroyed by Cheyenne and Kiowa Indians.
- The Secretary of the Interior recommended an allowance of $1,920 on February 5, 1891.
- The Commissioner of Indian Affairs had previously reported adversely to the claim.
- The United States reopened the case under the Indian Depredation Act of 1891.
- The government submitted the case on the same evidence used by the Secretary of the Interior.
Authorities
Legal principles applied
- presumption of correctness of administrative awards
- requirement of new evidence to challenge administrative findings