Burke v. McDonald
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Shoshone County. ■ In law the- center line is assumed to be the line of the lode, and the discovery lode is the controlling fact in the making of a valid location. This center line cannot be afterward changed so as to affect rights subsequently acquired. (Idaho Rev. Stats., see. 3100; Patterson v. Hitchcock, 3 Colo. 533; Wolfley v. Labanon Go., 4 Colo. 116; Eureka etc. Min. Go. v. Richmond Min. Go., 4 Saw. 323-324, Fed. Cas.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Shoshone County. ■ In law the- center line is assumed to be the line of the lode, and the discovery lode is the controlling fact in the making of a valid location. This center line cannot be afterward changed so as to affect rights subsequently acquired. (Idaho Rev. Stats., see. 3100; Patterson v. Hitchcock, 3 Colo. 533; Wolfley v. Labanon Go., 4 Colo. 116; Eureka etc. Min. Go. v. Richmond Min. Go., 4 Saw. 323-324, Fed. Cas. No. 4548.) It is for the sole purpose of protecting subsequent locators that the legal claim of not to exceed fifteen hundred by six hundred…
1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.
The appellants, as claimants of the Lacka-wanna lode mining claim, situated in Yreka mining district, Shoshone county, Idaho, filed in the local land office their application for patent therefor, to which the respondents, as claimants of the Mammoth claim, within the times required by law, filed in said land office their adverse claims, and commenced this action in the district court, in said county. Upon the trial of the cause before a jury, a general verdict was found in respondents’ favor, upon which a judgment being rendered, the appellants moved for a new trial, and, from the order of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Gwillim v. DonnellanSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Jupiter Mining Co. v. Bodie Consolidated Mining Co.District Court, D. California · 1881
- Richmond Mining Co. v. RoseSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Golden Fleece G. & S. M. Co. v. Cable Consolidated G. & S. M. Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1877
- McGinnis v. EgbertSupreme Court of Colorado · 1884
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Giffen v. City of LewistonIdaho Supreme Court · 1898
- Ellis v. Ashton & St. Anthony Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1925
- Flynn Group Mining Co. v. MurphyIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
- Watkins v. Mountain Home Co-operative Irrigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1921
- Upton v. Santa Rita Mining Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1907
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.