Legal Opinion

Anaconda Copper Mining Co. v. Heinze

Montana Supreme Court

Decided August 2, 1902No. 1,706PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from District Court, Silver Bow County; William Clancy, Judge. ActioN by tbe Anaconda Copper Mining Company against F. Augustus Heinze and others. From an order denying a temporary injunction, plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Brantly

delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.

Action in ejectment and for damages, in wbicb plaintiff seeks to recover possession of tbe Snow Bird quartz lode mining claim, situate in Silver Bow county, and tbe value of ores removed therefrom by tbe defendants'. Equitable relief by way of injunction is also sought to.restrain removal of ores pending tbe action, and perpetually, in case plaintiff succeeds in obtaining judgment.

Upon filing tbe complaint the plaintiff applied for and obtained an order requiring tbe defendants to show cause why they should not be enjoined pending tbe action. They appeared…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Merchants' National Bank v. GreenhoodMontana Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Montana Ore Purchasing Co. v. Butte & Boston Consolidated Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Montana Ore Purchasing Co. v. Boston & Montana Consolidated Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Cobban v. HecklenMontana Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Yosemite Growers Co-op Ass'n v. Case-Swayne Co.California Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. State ex rel. Rankin v. MartinMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Rumping v. RumpingMontana Supreme Court · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API