Walrath v. Champion Mining Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT. This action, brought in the Superior Court of Nevada County, California, involves title to a triangular shaped section of what is known as the “Contact,” “Ural” or-“Back” ledge of gold-bearing ore, situated in the same county, claimed by appellant to be a portion of the Providence Mine, to which complainant has title through a patent from the United States, and by appellee, a corporation, to be a part of the New…
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT. This action, brought in the Superior Court of Nevada County, California, involves title to a triangular shaped section of what is known as the “Contact,” “Ural” or-“Back” ledge of gold-bearing ore, situated in the same county, claimed by appellant to be a portion of the Providence Mine, to which complainant has title through a patent from the United States, and by appellee, a corporation, to be a part of the New Years Extension Mine owned by it. The relative situation of the two properties and the portion of the ledge in…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKenna
There are two questions presented by the assignment of errors:
(1.) What are the extralateral rights of the appellant on the Contact vein ?.
(2.) Is appellant entitled to that portion of the Contact vein within the Providence boundaries which lies north of the north end line fixed by the court, and which is described upon Pig. 1 as the parallelogram bounded by the lines, marked h-i-Tc-h f
(1.) The appellant contends that the patent of the Providence ledge was conclusive evidence of his title to thirty-one hundred feet in length of that vein. If true, this carried the northern end of the ledge…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mining Co. v. TarbetSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Iron Silver Mining Co. v. Elgin Mining & Smelting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
- King v. Amy & Silversmith Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Argentine Mining Co. v. Terrible Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Richmond Mining Company v. Eureka Mining CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1881
3Cited by18 opinions
- Stewart Mining Co. v. Ontario Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1913
- St. Louis Min. & Mill. Co. v. Montana Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1900
- Ferguson v. Basin Consolidated MinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Conkling Mining Co. v. Silver King Coalition Mines Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916
- Argonaut Mining Co. v. Kennedy Mining & Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.