Legal Opinion

Mammoth Gold Dredging Co. v. Forbes

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 1, 1940No. Civ. 6457PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

The defendants have appealed from a judgment which was rendered against them in a suit quieting title to a tract of land consisting of eight acres of the Yuba River bed at a point about fifteen miles northeast of Marysville. The land was purchased for placer mining purposes. The deed was executed in October, 1914, and described the premises as “lying and being between the present high water mark on the right bank of the Yuba River and the center of said river commencing with the south boundary line of Sec tion Number Twenty-one (21) in township number sixteen (16) North, of Range number six…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Herminghaus v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Hulen v. StuartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Miller & Lux Inc. v. SecaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Carpenter v. Board of County Com'rsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  5. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. RamseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Western Aggregates, Inc. v. County of YubaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  2. Capital National Bank v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Pinsky v. SloatCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  4. Campbell v. WeisbrodIdaho Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Culjak v. Better Built Homes, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1943

7 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