Hicks v. Bell
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Tenth Judicial District, for Yuba County. The complainants, styling themselves members of the National Mining Company, state that, on the 27th of July, 1852, and for two years previous, they were owners of a certain mining claim, situated in the bed of Yuba River, beginning at the mouth of Deer Creek and extending two hundred yards down said river,, including the bed of the same, and that said claim was held by the said plaintiffs “ according to the rules and…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Tenth Judicial District, for Yuba County. The complainants, styling themselves members of the National Mining Company, state that, on the 27th of July, 1852, and for two years previous, they were owners of a certain mining claim, situated in the bed of Yuba River, beginning at the mouth of Deer Creek and extending two hundred yards down said river,, including the bed of the same, and that said claim was held by the said plaintiffs “ according to the rules and customs of miners in the immediate vicinity of said river mining claim,” and was worked by them during the mining…
1Opinion of the CourtHeydenfeldt, Justice
Wells, Justice, concurred.
The objection that the record discloses that there was no actual possession, is not good, because it appears there was actual possession of a portion adjacent to the premises in dispute, and, as I understand it, constructive possession of the latter was claimed by the rules and customs of miners on that part of the river. Nor can it be determined that the jury were not properly informed as to what were these rules. The bill of exceptions does not pretend to set out all that occurred on the trial, but only such incidents as were subjects of dispute and exception.
The…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Boggs v. Merced Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
- Burns v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Irwin v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
- Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Neil v. Public Utilities CommissionIdaho Supreme Court · 1919
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.