rejecting Indians' claim that extinguishment of aboriginal title does not extinguish hunting and fishing rights, after surveying case law and concluding that "the right to hunt and fish has been held included in the right of occupancy"
How later courts described this case
- rejecting Indians' claim that extinguishment of aboriginal title does not extinguish hunting and fishing rights, after surveying case law and concluding that "the right to hunt and fish has been held included in the right of occupancy"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
NEWMAN, J., Dissenting.
I concur in the dissent, except that I do not share views proclaimed in Justice Mosk’s antepenultimate paragraph.
Petitioner’s application for a rehearing was denied November 13, 1981. Mosk, J., was of the opinion that the application should be granted.