Legal Opinion

Bales v. Ruch

District Court, E.D. California

Decided August 5, 1981No. Civ. S-81-232 PCWPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

RAMIREZ, District Judge.

Upon reviewing and considering the specific pleadings, the memorandum of points and authorities submitted by counsel for the defendants, the various exhibits marked and received into evidence and the respective arguments of counsel for the defendants, the Court now makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law pursuant to Rules 52 and 65, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs, the occupants of a placer mining claim, filed a claim and thereafter purportedly staked out a specific area in Placer County, California. In…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Best v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. ColemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Cole v. RalphSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  4. Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. National Football LeagueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
  5. Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1919

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Gold Hill Development Co., L.P. v. TSG Ski & Golf, LLCColorado Court of Appeals · 2015
  2. United States v. McClureDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2005
  3. Gold Hill Development Co., L.P. v. TSG Ski & Golf, LLCColorado Court of Appeals · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API