Hamburg Mining Co. v. Stephenson
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, Eureka County. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. The plaintiff in this case must recover, upon the strength of his own title, as in ejectment or trespass. If the plaintiff has neither title nor right- of possession, he cannot maintain an action to quiet the title, nor to remove a cloud therefrom. It is a legal impossibility to quiet a title or to remove a cloud from a title which has no existence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, Eureka County. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. The plaintiff in this case must recover, upon the strength of his own title, as in ejectment or trespass. If the plaintiff has neither title nor right- of possession, he cannot maintain an action to quiet the title, nor to remove a cloud therefrom. It is a legal impossibility to quiet a title or to remove a cloud from a title which has no existence. If the defendant was a-mere naked trespasser, absolutely without any color of right, it would be immaterial to the plaintiff,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Leonard, J.:
■This action was brought under section 256 of the civil practice act, to determine conflicting claims to real property.
Plaintiff is a corporation, and its business is mining and milling in this state, and especially in Eureka mining district.
In the complaint it is alleged that plaintiff is, and since a long time prior to February 5, 1879, has been, the owner, in possession, and entitled to the possession of the following-described land in Eureka county, in this state, to wit: “That certain piece or parcel of land consisting 'of one hundred and sixty acres, commencing…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Rogers v. CooneyNevada Supreme Court · 1872
- Cohen v. Eureka & Palisade RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1879