Case Name: LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. PENN et al.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1914-10-19
Citations: 137 La. 526
Docket Number: No. 20102
Parties: LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. PENN et al.
Judges: MONROE, C. J., takes no part.
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 137
Pages: 525–533

Head Matter:
(68 South. 859)
No. 20102.
LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. PENN et al.
(October 19, 1914.
On Rehearing, June 12, 1915.)
(Syllabus by the Court.)
1. Public Lands <&wkey;>59 — Confirmed Land Grant — Effect of State Selection and Approval.
. A land grant confirmed by Congress in 1820 (Act May 11, 1820, c. 87, 3 Stat. 573) cannot be affected by a state selection of the same land in 1850, under the swamp land grant of March 2, 1849 (Act March 2, 1849, c. 87, 9 Stat. 352), and the approval of the selection by the Commissioners of General Land Ofiice.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Public Lands, Cent. Dig. §§ 184, 185; Dec. Dig. &wkey;>59.]
2. Confirmed Land Grant —'Subsequent Excessive Location.
Where such confirmation was restricted to 2,000 acres, a subsequent location and patent covering much more than that quantity are void as to the excess, as against a confirmed state selection of the whole tract.
(Additional Syllables by Editorial Staff.)
On Rehearing.
3. Public Lands <&wkey;>59 — Approval op List— Lands Claimed and Held by Individuals.
Under Act Cong. March 2, 1849, c. 87, 9 Stat. 352, in accordance with which the approval by the Secretary of the Treasury of a list containing lands “not claimed or held bv individuals” vests the fee simple to the lands in the state, the approval of such a list did not vest title in the state to lands both claimed and held by individuals.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Public Lands, Cent. Dig. §§ 184, 185; Dec. Dig. <@=359.].
4. Public Lands'@=^59 — Claim under Grant —Suppiciency op Evidence — Selection by State and Approval.
Evidence in a jactitation suit which by defendant’s answer was converted into a petitory action wherein plaintiff claimed under a state selection made in 1850 under the swamp land grant (Act Cong. March 2, 1849, c. 87, 9 Stat. 352), and the approval of the selection by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, and defendants claimed under a land grant confirmed by Congress in 1820 (Act May 11, 1820, c. 87, 3 Stat. 573), held to show that the land in controversy, though unsurveyed, had been claimed continuously by the heirs of the original grantee, and that hence the title thereto never passed to the state or to the state’s assigns.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Public Lands, Cent. Dig. §§ 184, 185; Dec. Dig. &wkey;59.]
5. Public Lands &wkey;>106 — Confirmation op Claim — Effeoo>-Patent.
That commissioners acting under Act Cong. March 3, 1807, c. 36, § 2, 2 Stat. 440, providing that persons who on December 20, 1803, had for ten years been in possession of land not claimed by others, and not exceeding 2,000 acres, shall be confirmed in their title, mistakenly believed that they had power to confirm a claim only to the amount of 2,000 acres, and limited their confirmation of the title to an unsurveyed island to such acreage thereof, did not operate as a rejection of the claim for the remainder or invalidate the government patent subsequently issued to the claimant’s heirs for the entire island.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Public Lands, Cent. Dig. §§ 104, 301, 302; Dec. Dig. &wkey;106.]
6. Public Lands <&wkey;106 — Issuance op Patent — Existence op Facts — Determination op Land Department — Conclusiveness.
Where Congress has provided for the disposition of public lands of a particular character and authorized the Land Department to issue a patent for same on ascertainment of certain facts, such department has jurisdiction to inquire into and determine the existence of such facts, and,' in the absence of fraud, imposition, or- mistake, its determination is conclusive against collateral attack.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Public Lands, Cent. Dig. §§ 104, 301, 302; Dec. Dig. &wkey;106.j
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish, of Orleans; George H. Théard, Judge.
Action by the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company against Sarah L. Penn and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed on rehearing.
Denegre, Leovy & Chaffe, of New Orleans, for appellant. IT. L. Favrot and Lewis R. Graham, both of New Orleans (Dart, Kernan & Dart, of New Orleans, of counsel), for appellees. Rixford J. Lincoln, of New Orleans, curator ad hoc.

Opinion:
LAND, J.
This is a jactitation, suit, which was converted into a petitory action by the answer of the defendants. The question raised by the pleadings is whether the plaintiff or the defendants hold the legal title to a tract of land in the parish of Orleans, known as Brazilier's Island, containing about 2,500 acres.
Plaintiff claims through mesne conveyances from the state of Louisiana, and the state claimed from the United States by virtue of her selection and approval thereof under the swamp land grant of 1849. Defendants claim the property as the direct heirs and lineal descendants of Juan Baptista Brazilier, the original settler under the Frenen ana Spanish governments, and of the "heirs of Brazilier," whose claim was confirmed by act of Congress in the year 1820.
There was judgment in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed.
We have examined the respective titles of the litigants, and find the following state of facts:
On November 20, 1816, the claim of the heirs of Brazilier to a tract of land situated near Chef Menteur, in the Lake Pontchartrain, was reported for confirmation for a quantity not exceeding 2,000 acres, and was duly confirmed by act of Congress of May 11, 1820. In 1851-1853 the tract was regularly surveyed, and the claim, of the heirs of Bra zilier was located so as to embrace tbe whole oí Brazilier's Island. In December, 1907, a formal United States patent issued to the heirs of Brazilier to the tract as thus surveyed and located. Defendants are the descendants of the heirs of Brazilier.
The plaintiff claims under a selection of unsurveyed swamp and overflowed lands in the township made by the state in the yep.r 1850 under act of Congress approved March 2, 1849 (9 Stat. 352, c. 87), "excepting- such as are rightfully claimed or owned by individuals."
The selection thus made was in 1852 approved by the Acting Commissioner of the General Land Office. In 1869 the state patented the tract to the New Orleans, Mobile & Chattanooga Railway Company, and by several mesne conveyances the title derived from the state was finally vested in the plaintiff.
Section 2 of act of Congress of March 2," 1849, authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to approve state selections of swamp lands "so far as they are not claimed or held by individuals." It follows, we think, that as the claim of the heirs of Brazilier to the. island had been confirmed by Congress many years before its selection by the state, such selection was made and approved subject-to the superior claim of the heirs of Brazilier. Plaintiff contends that the United States patent conveyed more land than was confirmed by the act of Congress.
The claim of the heirs of Brazilier was to the whole island, and while it was reported for confirmation "for. a quantity not exceeding 2,000 acres," it was surveyed and located as containing 2,426.50 acres, and the United States patent issued for that quantity.
Plaintiff's counsel argue that defendants' title is bad, because the 2,Q00 acres confirmed was never surveyed and located. The answer ls that the defendant's claim has been surveyed, located, and patented for too much land, and the plaintiff is in the same situation. Under the circumstances, we think both parties should be nonsuited, as no final judgment can be rendered until said 2,000 acres are surveyed and located.
' It is therefore ordered that the judgment below be reversed, and the .demands - of both parties be dismissed as in case of nonsuit; costs of appeal 'to be paid by appellee, and the costs of the district court by the original plaintiff.'