Legal Opinion

Kirkpatrick v. Curtiss

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1926No. 19531. Department TwoPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.

The parties to this action are rival claimants to the possessory right of certain mining claims in the May Creek mining district in Snohomish county in this state. The plaintiff claims through location notices posted and filed some years prior to July 1, 1924. The defendants claim under location notices posted on that day and filed on July 7, 1924, and the amended notices filed on September IQ, 1924, and that the plaintiff failed to perform labor on the claims as required by law for the year ending July 1,1924. The trial was to the court without a jury and resulted in findings of fact,,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Strepey v. StarkSupreme Court of Colorado · 1884
  2. Bishop v. BaisleyOregon Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Gould v. McCormickWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Capron v. StroutNevada Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Farwell v. NeedhamOregon Supreme Court · 1897

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., & Hugh Brown, United States of America v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., and Hugh BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
  2. United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
  3. Karnes v. FlintWashington Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Pinkerton v. MooreNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Olympic Manganese Mining Co. v. DowningWashington Supreme Court · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API