Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
McKenzie County, North Dakota v. United States, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 24-1177 · judgment March 20, 2025
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
In the 1930s, the United States reacquired numerous acres of farm and ranch lands in western North Dakota through negotiated condemnation proceedings with McKenzie County. The United States filed Declarations of Taking where it took title to the lands in “fee simple absolute” “subject . . . to the rights of [the] County . . . to a 6¼% perpetual royalty in minerals which may exist or may be developed on all of said tracts of land.” The final 1930’s Judgments entered by U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota carried forward the language granting 6¼ percent royalty to McKenzie County. This conveyance was affirmed, and title to the royalty interest in the minerals was again quieted to the County in McKenzie County v. Hodel, Civ. No. 87-A4-211, J. in a Civil Action (D. N.D. June 24, 1991). Subsequently, the United States disavowed the conveyance of the 6¼ percent royalty interest in public domain minerals associated with tracts of land listed in the 1930’s Judgments. McKenzie County sought to enforce the prior judgments granting the County title to the 6¼ percent royalty interest in public domain minerals through the All Writs Act, but the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that any claim to resolve title involving the 6¼ percent royalty must come under the Quiet Title Act and such a claim was time barred. The Question Presented is: Whether the finality and preclusive effect of prior judgments involving the United States’ title to property can be enforced through the All Writs Act or if a separate claim to enforce the judgments must be brought under the Quiet Title Act?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Danielle Rae Bettencourt
Fairfield & Woods P.C.
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Proceedings
- Nov 10 2025Petition DENIED.
- Oct 15 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/7/2025.
- Oct 14 2025Reply of petitioner McKenzie County, North Dakota filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 29 2025Brief of respondents United States, et al. in opposition filed.
- Sep 02 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 29, 2025.
- Aug 29 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 29, 2025 to September 29, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jul 30 2025Response Requested. (Due August 29, 2025)
- Jul 16 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
- Jul 09 2025Waiver of right of respondent United States, et al. to respond filed.
- Jun 18 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 23, 2025)