Kirk v. Kane
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court.- — Hon. J. D. Perlcins, Judge. (1) Upon suspension of mining operations and failure to remove the mining plant from leased premises within sixty days after notice in writing so to do, the legal effect of the mining lease, under which the Eoberta Mining Company operated, was to invest in plaintiff the entire title to the mining machinery in controversy and the right to immediate possession thereof. Harrington v. Neville, 83 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court.- — Hon. J. D. Perlcins, Judge. (1) Upon suspension of mining operations and failure to remove the mining plant from leased premises within sixty days after notice in writing so to do, the legal effect of the mining lease, under which the Eoberta Mining Company operated, was to invest in plaintiff the entire title to the mining machinery in controversy and the right to immediate possession thereof. Harrington v. Neville, 83 Mo. App. 589. The word forfeit has various meanings depending upon the connection in which it is used. It has been held to be a word of…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
The plaintiff executed to one Reynolds a mining lease on certain land for a term of eight years. Reynolds assigned the lease to the Roberta Mining Company, a corporation. The lease contained a provision that the lessee or his assigns should keep one or more shafts at work continuously and put in and keep in operation thereon, pumps and pumping machinery of sufficient capacity to drain said land to the depth of at least two hundred feet, etc. There was a further provision to the effect that if said lessee or his assigns should fail to comply with.any of the provisions thereof, or fail to pay…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Northrup v. Mississippi Valley InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Greenway v. JamesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1864
- Young v. GlascockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Hills v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Smith v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1899
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re DawleySupreme Court of Vermont · 1926
- Kirk v. KaneMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903
- Mishawaka Woolen Manufacturing Co. v. PowellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903
- Haag v. WardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Hetzel v. FadnerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1911