Udall v. Tallman
- Decided
- April 26, 1965
- Docket
- 34
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,144 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that when a regulation must be interpreted, “a court must necessarily look to the administrative construction of the regulation if the meaning of the words used is in doubt” — In Re Lovin (2011)
- noting that the Supreme Court “gives great deference to the interpretation given the statute by the officers or agency charged with its administration” — Amy Cohen v. Brown University (1993)
- noting that the Supreme Court "gives great deference to the interpretation given the statute by the officers or agency charged with its administration" — Canutillo Independent School District v. Martha Leija and Jerry Leija as Next Friends of Rosemarie Leija, a Minor (1997)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Chief Justice Warren delivered the opinion of the Court.
At issue in this case is the effect of Executive Order No. 8979 and Public Land Order No. 487 upon the Secretary of the Interior’s authority to issue oil and gas leases.
Between October 15, 1954, and January 28, 1955, D. J. Griffin and other persons — hereinafter collectively referred to as the Griffin lessees — filed applications for oil and gas leases on approximately 25,000 acres located in the Kenai National Moose Range in Alaska. On August 14, 1958, the respondents filed offers to lease the same lands. Section 17 of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 provides, in relevant part, that “the person first making application for the lease who is qualified to hold a lease . . . shall be entitled to a lease of such lands without competitive bidding. . . .” 41 Stat. 443 (1920), as amended by 60 Stat. 951 (1946), 30 U. S. C. § 226 (1958 ed.). The Bureau of Land Management of the .Department of the Interior determined that the Griffin lessees were the persons who had applied first, and issued to them leases on the tracts, effective September 1, 1958. Respondents’ applications were reached for processing in [*3] October 1959, and were rejected on the ground that the lands had been leased to prior applicants. [1]
Statutes cited
Cite this
Udall v. Tallman, 380 U.S. 1 (1965)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.