Belcher Consolidated Gold Mining Co. v. Deferrari
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, in the Superior Court of Tuolumne County.
1Opinion of the Court
McKinstry, J.:
The complaint is in the ordinary form of ejectment, with an averment of damages caused by the excavation and removal of gold-bearing quartz by defendants during their adverse holding.
1. The Court below failed to find expressly upon the issue created by the denial of the averment as to damages. It is urged by appellants that this failure necessitates a reversal of the judgment. But no judgment was rendered for damages, and defendants (the appellants) can not complain of an omission which did them no injury. The judgment herein will constitute a bar to any further action to…
2Cited by19 opinions
- J. Bryant Kasey and Maryann Kasey v. Molybdenum Corporation of America, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- Bishop v. BaisleyOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- De Frieze v. QuintCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Ames v. Empire Star Mines Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1941
- Crane v. FrenchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.