Legal Opinion

Oro Fina Consolidated Mines, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided October 2, 1950No. 49486PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LITTLETON, Judge.

Plaintiff’s petition alleges that it has succeeded to the mining rights in a gold mining property known as the Oro Fina Mine in Placer County, California. It is alleged that on October 8,1942, the Director General for Operations of the War Production. Board “arbitrarily and without authority of law” issued a Gold Mining Order, known as Limitation Order L-208, classifying plaintiff’s gold mining property as a “nonessential mine” and requiring the operator to close down the mine.' On January 18, 1943, the mine was closed in compliance with the order. As a result of the-closing…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Home Building & Loan Assn. v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  4. Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  5. Hirabayashi v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1958
  2. Don Applegate and Gayle Applegate (For Themselves and a Class of Others Similarly Situated, Totalling 271) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
  3. Juda v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
  4. Philadelphia Suburban Corp.United States Court of Claims · 1978
  5. Pueblo v. Sociedad McCormickSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1956

25 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