Legal Opinion

Petersen v. Murphy

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 29, 1943No. Civ. 6856PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, P. J.

This action was brought by plaintiffs to determine the exact location and boundaries of a mining claim which had been excepted from a United States patent to the SE14 of the NW14 and the NE34 of the SW^4 of sec. 3, T. 6 N., E. 12 E., M.D.B.&M. Plaintiffs had acquired the patented land and defendants the mining claim. It appears that a segregation survey had been made by the United States in 1881, but that the field notes of same had been lost in the San Francisco fire of 1906. The area claimed by defendants to constitute the mining claim as excepted from the patent, covered a part of what…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Hicks v. ReisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Breeze v. BrooksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Haigler v. DonnellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Eastman v. PiperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  5. Ferguson v. KochCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Swars v. Council of City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Chamberlain v. AbelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  3. Schaefer v. BerinsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Ballenger v. TillmanMontana Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Coronet Credit Corp. v. West Thrift Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966

24 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