Legal Opinion

Young v. Papst

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 5, 1934PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

This is an action in ejectment to determine the title and the right to possession of eight placer mining claims situated in the Briggs creek unorganized mining district in Josephine county, on unappropriated but surveyed government land. Prom a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the answering defendants appeal.

It is alleged in the amended complaint that the plaintiff, on May 1, 1931, made a discovery of gold-bearing gravel on each of the 20-acre claims involved in this controversy; that, on May 6, 1931, he posted notices on each of these claims declaring his intention to hold and work said…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Farmington Gold Mining Co. v. Rhymney Gold & Copper Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Mitchell v. HutchinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Security Savings & Trust Co. v. OgdenOregon Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Steele v. PrebleOregon Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Inman v. OllsonOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Scoggin v. MillerWyoming Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Fuller Ex Rel. Fuller v. Mountain SculptureUtah Supreme Court · 1957
  5. McNulty v. KellySupreme Court of Colorado · 1959

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API