Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

United States v. Coleman

United States Supreme Court
390 U.S. 599 (1968)


Facts

Coleman (defendant) discovered quartzite stone, a commonly occurring mineral, on federal land in California. Coleman applied to the Department of the Interior (Department) for a land patent, claiming that the quartzite deposits were valuable mineral deposits under the General Mining Law of 1872, 30 U.S.C. § 22. The secretary of the interior (secretary) denied Coleman’s patent application, finding that quartzite did not qualify as a valuable mineral deposit because it did not pass the marketability test. The test required a showing that the mineral could be extracted, removed, and marketed at a profit. The federal government (government) (plaintiff) brought an ejectment action against Coleman in district court. Coleman filed a counterclaim requesting that the district court direct the secretary to issue a land patent. The district court entered summary judgment for the government. The court of appeals reversed, objecting to the use of the marketability test on the ground that the test imposed a more burdensome standard than the prudent-man test for rare minerals. The prudent-man test classified valuable mineral deposits as deposits that were of a character such that a prudent person would be justified in expending labor and means to develop a mine. The United States Supreme Court granted the government’s petition for certiorari. The government questioned Coleman’s intent in seeking the patent, noting that (1) Coleman had spent thousands of dollars and hours building a home in a scenic national forest near Los Angeles, (2) quartzite lacked a feasible market, and (3) large quantities of identical stone were located in areas outside of Coleman’s claim.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Black, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.