Document: 390 U.S. 365 88 S.Ct. 982 19 L.Ed.2d 1238 Frank P. POAFPYBITTY et al., Petitioners,v.SKELLY OIL COMPANY. No. 65. Argued Jan. 24, 1968. Decided March 18, Charles Hill Johns, Midwest City, Okl., for petitioners. John H. Cantrell, Oklahoma respondent. Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The question presented is whether petitioners, who are Comanche Indians, have standing to sue under an oil and gas lease approved by Department Interior use on land held Indians trust patents issued United States. 2 In 1947 Acting Commissioner Indian Affairs which petitioners had executed respondent, Skelly Oil Company, form prescribed Interior. first well was drilled in 1956, seven producing wells were soon completed. 1961 retained counsel with approval Interior1 brought this damage action against respondent District Court County, Oklahoma, alleging that breached express implied covenants thereby impaired petitioners' royalties. Respondent notified Bureau litigation, but Government made no attempt intervene proceedings. petition filed asserted permitted natural being produced from escape despite fact there a pipeline less than mile land.2 Petitioners claimed ignored their request be marketed continued allow wasted violation terms lease.3 sustained respondent's demurrer dismissed petition. Supreme affirmed ground precluded suing provisions regulations promulgated Secretary control leases restricted land.4 We granted certiorari, 389 814, 30, 64 (1967), determine federal restrictions imposed prevented them vindicating rights. our view, decision below unduly restricts right seek judicial relief injury interests lease. 3 General Allotment Act 1887, 24 Stat. 388, as amended, 25 U.S.C. §§ 331—358, provided individual allotted reservations5 States hold 'in sole benefit Indian' allottees 25-year period. § 348. During period, has been repeatedly extended,6 may sold or leased only consent these Indian's his mere incidents promises various treaties protect effect capacity institute court necessary property. order fulfill national safeguard at same time 'to prepare take place independent, qualified members modern body politic,' Board County Comm'rs Creek v. Seber, 318 705, 715, 63 920, 926, 87 L.Ed. 1094 (1943), allotment system created receiving ownership rights while power scrutinize transactions might separated Squire Capoeman, 351 1, 9, 76 611, 100 883 (1956). See, e.g., 18 Cong.Rec. 190—192 (1886). This dual purpose would frustrated unless both empowered allotment. obligation such litigation aid protection recognized Rickert, 188 432, 23 478, 47 532 (1903); Heckman States, 224 413, 32 424, 56 820 (1912); Candelaria, 271 46 561, 70 1023 (1926). See generally Federal Law 326—341 (Dept. Interior, 1958). Heckman, set aside improper conveyance land, realized States.7 'A transfer allotments not simply proprietary Indian. It violates governmental States.' U.S., 438, 432. 4 holding could allotment, indicated either bring suit itself prosecuted 5 'In what cases will undertake represent owners lands suits sort left acts Congress discretion Executive Department. allottee own action, if so brought, him its conduct * *. And when undertakes restriction brings cancel prohibited transfers, necessarily precludes prosecution any other similar relating property.' Id., 446, 435. 6 Later decisions followed implications did diminish behalf. Nation 629, 784, 1046 tribes railroad even though failure collect sums allegedly due.8 stated, 'That also preclude bringing actions.' 640, 790. Accord, Lane Pueblo Santa Rosa, 249 110, 39 185, 504 (1919); Skokomish Tribe France, 269 F.2d 555 (C.A. 9th Cir. 1959). Nor does existence Government's affect Indian.9 without sued respect affairs, including Both act April 12, 1926 recognize defend actions behalf subject intervene.' Sadler Public Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 172 870, 874 (C.A.10th 1949). Choctaw Chickasaw Nations Seitz, 193 456, 459 1951), stated supra, Lane, 'clearly pueblos maintain lands, although bound judgment it party, tribe pueblo.' Brown Anderson, 61 Okl. 136, 160 724 (1916), 'fully answered' argument guardian held: 7 'Osborne defendant error, full-blood Indian, citizen state Oklahoma. No good reason appears why he should denied privilege appealing courts enforce property, property upon alienation Congress.' 138—139, P., 726. 8 Bell Fitzpatrick, 53 574, 157 334 (1916); L. Mills, Land Laws 328 (1924). agree preventing selling leasing official do prevent landowner, like owners, maintaining appropriate 9 There remains govern those seeking alleged impairment argues complete over can action. 10 mining purposes 'by said allottee' expressly authorized 396. Although required, lessor cannot grant authority.10 promulgate controlling operation development issue written instructions lessee. Ibid. CFR 172.1 172.33 (1967); 30 221.1—221.67 (1967). lessee required furnish surety bond, amount satisfactory Secretary, guaranteeing compliance lease, incorporate Secretary. 396c. inspect premises books records 172.25 impose drilling production 'as proper resources lessor.' 172.24 must monthly report disclosing all operations conducted 221.60—221.65 pay royalties deposits credit lessor. 172.14, 172.16 agrees drill determines drainage another adjoining 221.21 Finally, obligated waste full value wasted, sanctioned law. 221.18, 221.35 11 While exercised supervisory authority considerable detail, we find nothing regulatory scheme If course satisfy obligations filing However, requiring administrative instead instituting legal proceedings own. more diminishes general affected Furthermore, Affairs, agency charged fulfilling faced 'with almost staggering problem attempting discharge thousands scattered allotments. some cases, adequate fulfillment responsibilities undoubtedly involve costs running many times income H.R.Rep. 2503, 82d Cong., 2d Sess., (1952). Recognizing burdens realizing depend zeal government attorney, support position lease.11 12 empower 'for cause application lessee, satisfied heretofore hereafter violated.' 172.23 justification concluding severe sanction cancellation breaches wish resolve disagreement payment damages basically 13 defeated provides 'before removed,' concludes, 'Provided, That after removed shall entitled available remedy law equity breach contract lessee.'12 warrant implying negative inference proviso denial remedies otherwise prior removal alienate land. Section merely terminated, supervision likewise come end, impairing continuing Compare 172.28 (1967).13 14 Respondent's favor procedural grounds untenable. Since Court's rested solely grounds, rejected failed reach grounds. intimate view merits case. conformed requirements fail. lessors Accordingly, reversed remanded further inconsistent opinion. ordered. 15 Reversed remanded. 16 MARSHALL took part consideration Area Director between attorney services rendered connection litigation. delegated approve employment attorneys compensated quantum meruit basis funds. Order 551 Fed.Reg. 2939 (1951), 22 6066 (1957). violated 86.3 Gas Conservation Act. Okl.Stat., Tit. 52, (1951). response motion require elect separately one based tort, Court, parties, struck conservation statute After announced then sought recovery motion. provides: '3. foregoing, hereby agrees: '(f) Diligence, prevention waste.—To exercise reasonable diligence operating covered hereby, products secured paying quantities; carry hereunder workmanlike manner accordance methods practice, having due regard developed *' reported. establish 345. note following see 462, 'The existing periods placed thereof extended until directed 'This interest expressed limited assertion incident reversion technical title trust.' 437, 431 (1912), quoted Hellard, 322 363, 366, 985, 987, 1326 (1944). now claims Claims Commission Act, 60 1049 (1946), 70—70w. For arising August 13, 1946, 28 1505, conferring jurisdiction Claims. '(T)he clearly recognized, party.' 336 (1958). A 396 give offer deceased heirs determined found. Memorandum amicus curiae states, 7: sum, contention that, trusteeship ended, landowners disabled they unsupported governing statutes, implementing regulations, lease.' '6. Cancellation forfeiture.—When, conditions before removed, days notice specifying violated, hearing, within receipt notice, declare null void, entitled, immediate possession land: Provided, lessee.' regulation dealing avoids danger stating: 'Oil contain authorizing Department, shall, alienation, operated entirely free supervision, cease.

Category: 1