Callahan v. James
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County and from an order denying a new trial. G. W. Nicol, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
SHAW, J.—
This is an action by the plaintiff for a decree determining the title to a certain mining claim situated in the town of Groveland, and known as the Rhode Island Mining Claim. Judgment in the court below was given for the plaintiff; the defendants’ motion for a new trial was denied, and from the judgment and order the defendants appeal.
The plaintiff claims title to the mining claim under a mining location originally made in the year 1854, by one Reid, and relocated by Reid and one Austin January 1, 1876. The plaintiff obtained a conveyance of the mine from Reid and the successor of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hammer v. Garfield Mining & Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Winslow v. GohransenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Himmelman v. HenryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Quigley v. GillettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Emerson v. McWhirterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Tosco Corp. v. HodelDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1985
- Huntington v. VavraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
- Emerson v. Kennedy Mining & Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Hubbard v. San Diego Electric RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Wiltsee v. UtleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.