Legal Opinion

Victor Mining Co. v. Morning Star Mining Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 13, 1892PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from the Jasper Circuit Cowrt. — Hou. M. 0. McG-reg-or.,. Judge. - (1) The plaintiff has an adequate and complete remedy at law. R. S., sec. 8675; Pearson v. Inlow, 20 Mo. 322; Austm v. Coal & Mining Co., 72 Mo. 535; Henry v. Low, 73 Mo. 96; Mays v. Tappan, 23 Cal. 306; Gollerv. Felt, 30 Cal. 481. In a suit for damages it was held that plaintiff was entitled to recover for the support taken from the adjoining soil so as to injure him.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Jasper Circuit Cowrt. — Hou. M. 0. McG-reg-or.,. Judge. - (1) The plaintiff has an adequate and complete remedy at law. R. S., sec. 8675; Pearson v. Inlow, 20 Mo. 322; Austm v. Coal & Mining Co., 72 Mo. 535; Henry v. Low, 73 Mo. 96; Mays v. Tappan, 23 Cal. 306; Gollerv. Felt, 30 Cal. 481. In a suit for damages it was held that plaintiff was entitled to recover for the support taken from the adjoining soil so as to injure him. Busby v. Holthaus, 46 Mo. 161. (2) Although every proprietor of the land has a right to the support of the soil of an adjacent lot as the natural…

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.

— The plaintiff, an incorporated mining company, brought its action to enjoin the defendants, who were a partnership engaged in mining operations under the name of the Morning Star Mining Company, from mining lead and zinc ores on *529their own land at and near the line dividing it from that of the defendants. Plaintiff had opened a drift from forty to fifty feet high, and about three hundred feet' long up to and along the dividing line between its mine and that of defendants. The defendant had opened a drift on its side of the line about twenty feet wide and one hundred feet long, so that the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Thurston v. HancockMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
  2. Charless v. RankinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
  3. Moody v. McClellandSupreme Court of Alabama · 1863
  4. Busby v. HolthausSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
  5. Bailey v. WadeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Eads v. GainsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894
  2. Gordon v. MansfieldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900
  3. XI Properties, Inc. v. RaceTrac Petroleum, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Sills v. GoodyearMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
  5. Walters v. HamiltonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API