Byrne

United States v. Byrne

Good Law
291 F.3d 1056·2002 WL 1060836
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 2002No. 00-16008California2,222 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thomas, J.

ORDER AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed January 28, 2002, is amended as follows:

The footnote 5 at slip opinion page 1170 is deleted in its entirety.

*1059 A footnote is added at slip opinion page 1170 in the first full paragraph, after the quote ending with “... when the land should be identified and the patent issued”, which shall read: “Appellees suggest that because perfected title to swamp lands is deemed effective as of the date of the Act, the appropriate starting date for the river analysis is 1850. We find this argument unpersuasive. The relation back doctrine may make the interest within the 1905 boundaries good as of 1850, but the doctrine cannot expand or contract the boundaries created by the 1905 patent. As the cases we cite in the text indicate, boundaries to swamp and overflow lands are determined exclusively by the process of identification and patent. Any other rule would create uncertainty among land owners, as all subsequent interests to land in swamp and overflow areas might fear that their property lines could be altered by earlier, unknown river movements. See Wright v. Roseberry, 121 U.S. 488, 505 , 7 S.Ct. 985 , 30 L.Ed. 1039 (1887) (stating…

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.