Legal Opinion

Lucky Five Mining Co. v. Central Idaho Placer Gold Mining Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 1951No. 7706PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAYLOR, Justice.

The appellant, plaintiff below, brought this action in 1943 to quiet its title to eight placer mining claims in Elk City and Oro-grande mining districts in Idaho County, Idaho. Due to delays, allegedly occasioned by World War II, the action did not come to trial until March 28, 1950. In the meantime, the complaint was amended to set forth a detailed metes and bounds description of two of the claims, the “Relief Placer No. 2” and “California Placer.” The amendment was made to conform the description in the pleading to amended lo cation notices filed in 1947. The answer of the…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Trice v. ComstockCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
  2. Probst v. HughesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
  3. Fogelstrom v. MurphyIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Bismark Mountain Gold Mining Co. v. North Sunbeam Gold Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Bennett v. HarkraderSupreme Court of the United States · 1895

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hyde v. LawsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Eagan v. ColwellIdaho Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Parke v. ParkeIdaho Supreme Court · 1955
  4. McNulty v. KellySupreme Court of Colorado · 1959
  5. Lucky Five Mining Co. v. H. & H. Mines, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API