Legal Opinion

Betts v. Stephenson

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 9, 1950No. Civ. 4120PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an action to quiet the plaintiff’s title to a group of unpatented mining claims. The defendants moved for a nonsuit on the grounds that the evidence did not show that these claims were open and unappropriated government land at the time in question; that the evidence disclosed that the discovery work was insufficient under section 2304 of the Public Resources Code; and that the locations were null and void under section 2307 of that code. In considering the motion the court stated that there was so far a failure of proof under section 2304, and offered the plaintiff an opportunity to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hammer v. Garfield Mining & Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Wilson v. FreemanMontana Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Thornton v. KaufmanMontana Supreme Court · 1910

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. MacDonald v. Midland Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Smith v. DalyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Pascoe v. RichardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API