Legal Opinion · Dissent

ECM, Inc. v. Placer Dome U.S., Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 7, 2005No. 03-15896Published

1DissentBea, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent.

The facts of this case are relatively straightforward. ECM, Inc. (“ECM”) staked the Gold Acres South (“GAS”) claim in Nevada. Placer Dome U.S. Inc. (“PDUS”) staked claims to the northwest of the GAS claim. ECM leased the GAS claim to Royal Gold, Inc. (“Royal Gold”) pursuant to the ECM Lease. Section 19(b) of the ECM Lease stated:

Lessee [Royal Gold] shall furnish lessor [ECM], upon request by Lessor and at termination of this Lease, any reports and data regarding the leased Property gathered or prepared by Lessee or its agents including, but not limited to, reports and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Wheeler v. SchadNevada Supreme Court · 1871
  2. City of Reno v. MatleyNevada Supreme Court · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API