Castagnetto v. Coppertown Mining & Smelting Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion. Congdon & Congdon, E. B. Young, and Aylett R. Cotton, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
This action was brought by plaintiff in his own right, and as assignee of several other parties to foreclose liens for labor performed in a mining claim on the premises of appellant described in the complaint. He recovered judgment for the amount of the claims, interest, and attorney’s fee. A decree was accordingly entered, directing a sale of appellant’s property to satisfy the judgment. From the judgment this appeal is taken by Costa, the owner of the premises. The appeal being from the judgment without any bill of exceptions, we must presume that the findings are supported by the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Smelting Co. v. KempSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. FisherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Malone v. Big Flat Gravel Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1888
- C.A. MacOmber v. L. M. BigelowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Tredinnick v. Red Cloud Consolidated Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1887
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lamb v. Goldfield Lucky Boy Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1914
- San Pedro Lumber Co. v. SchroeterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Gage Canal Co. v. East Riverside Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Howell v. GundersonAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1967