Maye v. Tappan
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Eleventh Judicial District, Placer County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.
This is an action to recover damages, in the sum of $2,000, which the plaintiffs allege they sustained, by reason of the acts of the defendants, in entering upon the mining claim of the plaintiffs, and taking away gold and gold-bearing earth of that value. The *307case was tried by a jury, who found for the plaintiffs damages in the sum of fifty dollars, for which amount judgment was rendered, and the plaintiffs appeal therefrom, and from an order refusing a new trial.
The appellants contend that they were entitled to a judgment for the sum claimed in their complaint upon the pleadings. It does…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Boggs v. Merced Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
- Baker v. Wheeler & MartinNew York Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by25 opinions
- Lightner Mining Co. v. LaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Omaha & Grant Smelting & Refining Co. v. TaborSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
- Verdugo Ca&209on Water Co. v. VerdugoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Meeker v. GardellaWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Austin v. Huntsville Coal & Mining Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1880
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.