Fascinating Mississippi Supreme Court case

 Read: https://law.justia.com/cases/mississippi/supreme-court/2024/2022-sa-01088-sct.html

Issue: Whether a 1784 land grant from Spanish King Charles III was valid.

Holding: Yes.

Reasoning:  The case of Cinque Bambini P’ship v. State, 491 So. 2d 508, 511(Miss.  1986) does not apply because it dealt with a Spanish land grant of 1813, which was after West Florida, south of the 31st parallel, became part of Mississippi Territory in 1812.

The cases of: Pollard v. Hagan,  44  U.S.  212,  11  L.  Ed.  565  (1845),  and Henderson v. Poindexter’s Lessee, 25 U.S. 530, 6 L. Ed. 718 (1827), also do not apply because they dealt with land north of the 31st parallel, which became part of the US in the 1783 Treaty of Paris.  Spain initially disputed the boundaries, but it agreed that the 31st parallel was the dividing line in the 1795 Treaty of San Lorenzo.

However, the ownership of the land below the 31st parallel is more contentious.  The history is detailed in the cases US v. States of La., Tex., Miss., Ala. &Fla., 363 U.S. 1, 80 (1960) and US v. Louisiana, 382 U.S. 288, (1965), and they refer to the cases of Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. 253, (1829), overruled by United States v. Percheman, 32 U.S. 51,  (1833).

The ownership of the land in question was passed to Spain from Great Britain by a treaty dated Sept 3, 1783.  By the Treaty of San Ildefonso in 1800, France acquired it, and finally in the 1803 Treaty of Paris, the US acquired the land from France.  Since Spain owned the land in 1784, the land grant is clearly valid.

Hat tip: https://reason.com/volokh/2024/04/11/private-landowner-in-mississippi-beats-state-based-on-interpretation-of-1784-spanish-land-grant/

See also:  https://history.state.gov/milestones/1784-1800/pickney-treaty