Johnson v. M’Intosh
United States Supreme Court
21 U.S. 543 (1823)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
In 1763, when Virginia was a colony under British rule, the king of England issued a proclamation reserving all lands west of the Appalachians for American Indians and prohibiting British subjects from purchasing or settling on those lands. In 1773 and 1775, chiefs of certain American Indian tribes made two sales of tracts in the west Appalachian area, the first to William Murray and others and the second to Louis Vivat and others. After the colonies obtained their independence from Britain, Virginia subsequently transferred its acquired interest in the west Appalachian land to the newly formed United States. The land ultimately became part of the state of Illinois. Joshua Johnson and Thomas Graham (plaintiffs), who inherited a portion of the land from an original grantee of the 1775 purchase from the tribes, unsuccessfully petitioned the United States to recognize their title to the land. They subsequently changed tack, seeking to use litigation to establish their title. They filed suit against William McIntosh (M‘Intosh) (defendant), who had purchased some of the relevant land from the federal government and was occupying it. They sought M‘Intosh’s ejectment. The district court declined to recognize Johnson’s and Graham’s title and thus ruled in M‘Intosh’s favor. The United States Supreme Court reviewed the decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Marshall, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 964,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,006 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New
Understand your casebook readings in seconds
Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.
Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,006 law school casebooks.
