Winters v. United States
Significance, Water For The Pursuit Of "civilization", A Special Right, Impact, Reservation Populations
Henry Winters, John W. Acker, Chris Cruse, Agnes Downs and the Empire Cattle Company
That appropriated water rights to the Milk River of Montana were valid and had priority over those of the Fort Belknap Native Americans and the United States.
Chief Lawyer for Appellants
Edward C. Day
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Sanford, Assistant Attorney General
Justices for the Court
William Rufus Day, Melville Weston Fuller, John Marshall Harlan I, Joseph McKenna (writing for the Court), Oliver Wendell Holmes, William Henry Moody, Rufus Wheeler Peckham, Edward Douglass White
David Josiah Brewer
Date of Decision
6 January 1908
Found in favor of the United States affirming two lower court decisions that the tribes held implied water rights through their agreement with the United States that took priority over latter nearby settlers.
- United States v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371 (1905).
- Arizona v. California, 373 U.S. 546 (1963).
- Cappaert v. United States, 426 U.S. 128 (1976).
Statistical Abstract of the United States 1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Government, 1997.
- Yick Wo v. Hopkins - Significance
- Wilson v. New - Significance, The Eight-hour Workday
- Winters v. United States - Significance
- Winters v. United States - Further Readings
- Winters v. United States - Water For The Pursuit Of "civilization"
- Winters v. United States - A Special Right
- Winters v. United States - Impact
- Winters v. United States - Reservation Populations
- Other Free Encyclopedias