Court Opinion

ID: 8757856
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-26 11:54:00.946542+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:01:22.162239
License: Public Domain

GILBERT, Circuit Judge
(dissenting). I think there is enough in the record which is before us to show that facts came to the knowledge of the defendant in error and his agents sufficient to put them upon inquiry as to the manner in which the lands were obtained from the United States. The deeds from the various entry-men to Cobban showed that the latter was carrying out a large and comprehensive scheme to obtain the lands. Seventeen of those deeds were made on September 16, 1899, 39 were executed on November 11th, and 33 were executed on November 13th. The deeds also showed that the final receiver’s receipts had been issued but a short time before the execution of the deeds. Some were issued but two days before the deeds. Others were issued at intervals of from one week to three or four weeks prior to the deeds. These are significant facts, and indicated a concert of action, of which Cobban was the engineer. The evidence shows, also, that the inspection of these lands by the defendant’s agents was contemporaneous with the entries, and that large sums were loaned by the defendant in error to Cobban, to be used by him for the purpose of obtaining title to these lands. There are many other facts and circumstances in the evidence pointing to the conclusion that the defendant in error knew enough of the methods by which the lands were obtained to put him upon inquiry.