Seaverns v. Costello
Arizona Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the First Judicial District in and for the County of Cochise. F. M. Doan, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtDayis, J.
On the fourth day of June, 1901, Martin Costello commenced an action in the court below against the *310Arizona Eastern and Montana Smelting, Ore Purchasing and Development Company, the Turquoise Mining Company, and George W. Seaverns, to quiet his title to the Mona, a patented mining claim, situate in the Tombstone 'Mining District. The defendant companies made no defense to the suit. The defendant George W. Seaverns filed an answer and cross-complaint. The answer generally and specifically denies each and every allegation of the complaint. In his cross-complaint the defendant “alleges that he…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Grimm v. O'ConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Simmons v. McCarthyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Hughes v. CannedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Sterling v. WelcomeNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Wakeley v. MohrWisconsin Supreme Court · 1864
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Shannon Copper Co. v. PotterArizona Supreme Court · 1910
- Matson v. MatsonUtah Supreme Court · 1920
- Silver Queen Mining Co. v. CrockerArizona Supreme Court · 1904