Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Congress regulated the passage of Indian lands and basically fouled things up with a system that created interests in land that were so fractional as to be unmanageable and downright ridiculous with a large portion of Indian land being owned by fractional interests. Congress then passed the Indian Land Consolidation Act of 1983 to fix the problem by escheat to the tribe if the fractional interest represents 2 percentum or less of the total acreage and has earned less than $100 in the preceding year before it is due to escheat. There was no provision in the act for payment for compensation to the owners of land covered by the Act. Irving (P) sued for the loss of interests under the Act as being a violation of the Fifth Amendment. The District Court held that the statute was constitutional, but the Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that P’s decedents had a right, derived from the original Sioux allotment statute, to control disposition of their property at death, that P had standing to invoke such right, and that the taking of the right without compensation to decedents' estates violated the Fifth Amendment.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.