Legal Opinion

Mohr v. North Rawhide Mining & Development Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided January 19, 1918No. Sac. No. 2469PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.

The defendants, the North Rawhide Mining and Development Company and Richard Chute, appeal from a judgment declaring that the plaintiff is the owner of an undivided interest in a certain mining claim. The theory of the complaint was that the claim, which was originally owned by the Coast Development Company, was sold on execution; that the sheriff’s deed was made to Chute, who took title in trust for the plaintiff and other execution creditors of said Coast Development Company; and that the appellant corporation took a conveyance of the claim from Chute with notice of plaintiff’s equitable…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Coats v. CoatsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Winslow v. GohransenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Himmelman v. HenryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Hall v. ArnottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Rudel v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Biaggi v. MaineroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  2. Hubbard v. San Diego Electric RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Kammerer v. MarinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  4. Goetting v. GoettingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  5. Citizens National Trust & Savings Bank v. MaherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936

4 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