Adams v. Yukon Gold Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
Many of the errors assigned go to the sufficiency of the" evidence to sustain the findings; but a careful reading of the record satisfies us that the findings are all in accord with the evidence and must stand. We therefore pass to the consideration of what legal principles should control. Under the ruling of McIntosh v. Price, 121 F. 716, 58 C.C.A. 136, Zimmerman v. Funchion et al., 161 F. 859, 89 C.C.A. 53, Waskey v. Hammer, 170 F. 31, 95 C.C.A. 305, and Jones v. Wild Goose M. & T. Co., 177 F. 95, 101 C.C.A. 349, 29 L.R.A.(N.S.) 392, a location of a placer…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Varnum v. AbbotMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- McIntosh v. PriceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1903
- Jones v. Wild Goose Mining & Trading Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1910
- Zimmerman v. FunchionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1908
- Waskey v. HammerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
3Cited by3 opinions
- Howard v. ManningSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Velasco v. MalloryCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967
- Union Gas Oil Company v. GillemCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925