Legal Opinion
Butte Copper & Zinc Co. v. Amerman
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 24, 1946No. 11224PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORR, Circuit Judge.
Appellees, seeking recovery for damages to a building owned by them in the city of Butte, Montana, brought this suit against appellants, owners and operators of a mine upon a portion of the surface of which the building in suit is situated. Sub-surface mining operations were carried on by appellants in the Emma mine, those nearest the surface being conducted at the 300-foot level. This suit is based upon the theory that blasting in the mine, a necessary operation in mining, caused the damage and, further, that the said mining operations caused the subsidence of the surface…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Tennant v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Improvement Company v. MunsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Bookbinder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Corrigan v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Harold D. Blankenship, an Individual v. The Hearst Corporation, a Corporation, William H. Myers, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Chisholm Brothers Farm Equipment Co. v. International Harvester CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
- Washington v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
- Alman Brothers Farms & Feed Mill, Inc. v. Diamond Laboratories, Inc., and Southwestern Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- Autohaus Brugger, Inc. v. Saab Motors, Inc., and Saab-Scania of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.