Lightner Mining Co. v. Lane
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This is an action hy the owner of a mine, against the owners of an adjoining mine, to recover the value of certain ore alleged to have been extracted by the defendants from the mine of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff claims the ownership of a mine known as the Lightner mine. The defendants are the owners of the Utica mine, which adjoins the end line of the Lightner mine, and lies southeasterly of it. The vein is about eighty feet thick and extends from the southeast to the northwest through both claims. The ore was taken by the defendants at the depth of 525 feet below the surface by means of a…
2Cases cited59 opinions
- Bailey v. GloverSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Rosenthal v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Lewey v. H. C. Fricke Coke Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. GayTexas Supreme Court · 1894
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by94 opinions
- Nancy Sullivan v. C. Francis Murphy, Corporation Counsel of the District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- Pashley v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
- Consolidated Reservoir & Power Co. v. ScarboroughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Leeper v. BeltramiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- John W. Skeels v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corporation v. Estelle A. Skeels, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1964
89 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.