Elaine S. Stickelman v. United States of America

Good Law
563 F.2d 413·1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 11086
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 197775-3476California2,401 words

Opinion

Opinion

Goodwin, J.

This is an appeal by a land claimant from a summary judgment for the government.

Elaine S. Stickelman applied for 320 acres in Nevada under the Desert Land Act, 43 U.S.C. § 321 , et seq. According to the terms of her entry, she had until February 18, 1970, to make final proof that the land had been reclaimed and cultivated as the Act required.

After expending an alleged $18,000 on parts of the 320 acres, Stickelman was unable to “prove up” her entry. Claiming “unavoidable delay in the construction of irrigation works”, she applied for and was granted a two-year extension under 43 U.S.C. § 333 .

Ill health and financial reverses again caused Stickelman to fail to “prove up”, and she requested a second extension, under 43 U.S.C. § 334 . The Bureau of Land Man agement (BLM) denied this second request. Stickelman appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), which, without a hearing, upheld the BLM’s decision.

Stickelman filed in the district court a petition to review the agency’s decision. In granting the government’s motion for summary judgment, the court held: (1) that it did not have jurisdiction to review the denial of an extension sought under 43 U.S.C. § 334 ; (2)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.