McCarthy v. Bunker Hill & Sullivan Mining & Concentrating Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the District of Idaho. The bill in this case was filed in the court below November 23, 1904. It was brought by the appellants McCarthy, Haney, and Doty against the Bunker Hill & Sullivan Mining & Concentrating Company, Federal Mining & Smelting Company, the Gold Hunter Mining & Smelting Company, corporations, and Peter Larson and Thomas L. Greenough, copartners under the firm name and style of…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the District of Idaho. The bill in this case was filed in the court below November 23, 1904. It was brought by the appellants McCarthy, Haney, and Doty against the Bunker Hill & Sullivan Mining & Concentrating Company, Federal Mining & Smelting Company, the Gold Hunter Mining & Smelting Company, corporations, and Peter Larson and Thomas L. Greenough, copartners under the firm name and style of “Larson & Greenough.” After alleging the jurisdictional facts, the bill averred that in the year 1891 McCarthy acquired…
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The extent and value of the mining operations of the appellees are not controverted, and it is practically conceded on behalf of the appellants that the granting of the injunction to which it .is insisted they are entitled must necessarily result in closing those great operations in the Cceur d’Alene region, in the depopulation of that section of country, the destruction not only of the mining business there, but the business of the numerous towns that are shown by the record to be wholly dependent upon that industry, and the depriving of many of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kansas v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Georgia v. Tennesssee Copper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- New York City v. PineSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Parker v. Winnipiseogee Lake Cotton & Woollen Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1863
- Mountain Copper Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1906
3Cited by30 opinions
- Harrisonville v. W. S. Dickey Clay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Hulbert v. California Etc. Cement Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Riter v. Keokuk Electro-Metals CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1957
- Coeur D'Alene Tribe v. Asarco Inc.District Court, D. Idaho · 2003
- Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. International Harvester Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.