Legal Opinion

Brugger v. Lee Yim

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 20, 1936No. Civ. 1598PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.

The plaintiffs, who are lessees in possession of a mining claim known as the Old Pete Extension claim instituted this action in trespass against the defendants who are owners of an adjoining claim known as the Old Pete claim. The complaint alleges that plaintiffs are entitled to the possession of a certain vein or lode known as “The Old Pete Extension” which has its apex within the exterior boundaries of their claim and which departs from the side lines of said claim in its downward course or dip. It is further alleged that plaintiffs have the right to occupy, mine and extract mineral from…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. People v. MilnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Ethel D. Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Mining Co. v. TarbetSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  4. Hatton v. GreggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
  5. Stewart Mining Co. v. Ontario Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. McCulloughCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  2. Noble v. Kertz & Sons Feed & Fuel Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. Anderson v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. Redd v. Airway Motor Coach Lines, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1943
  5. In Re C & P Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1945

1 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