Chicago Quartz Mining Co. v. Oliver
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court of Nevada County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSharpsteih, J.
This is an action to quiet title. The plaintiff claims under a mining patent issued August 16, 1883; defendant under a patent issued to the Central Pacific Railroad Company, dated April 18, 1870.
*196The only question is, whether the title to the premises in controversy vested in the railroad company under the act of Congress entitled “ An act to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean,” etc., approved July 1, 1862, and the act amendatory thereof, approved July 2, 1864.
The land is within the boundaries of one of the sections covered by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Smelting Co. v. KempSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Leavenworth, Lawrence, & Galveston Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Wright v. RoseberrySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- McLaughlin v. PowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gale v. BestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Ames v. Empire Star Mines Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1941
- Van Ness v. RooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- United Land Ass'n v. KnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Ames v. Empire Star Mines Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.