Hammon v. American Exploration & Mining Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.
An action for breach of a mineral lease, seeking principally royalties for the removed minerals, an injunction against encumbrance of claims covered by the agreement and a decree establishing the rights and duties of the parties under the contract, does not become a local action because realty may be involved. In substance, this is a single action for the redress of one wrong; the main relief sought is personal, and the action is transitory.
Appellant filed Ms complaint against respondent mining company in the City and County of San Francisco. Respondent, whose principal place of business was…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Peiser v. MettlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Wulfjen v. DoltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Coley v. HeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Neet v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- State v. Royal Consolidated Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ebeling v. Continental Illinois Natl. Bank & Trust Co. of ChicagoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Foundation Engineers, Inc. v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA CTY.California Court of Appeal · 1993
- Wright v. BellDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1964