Clark v. McElvy
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourteenth Judicial District, County of Nevada. Ejectment to recover a mining claim. The case was tried before a jury, who, under the instruction of the Court, returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourteenth Judicial District, County of Nevada. Ejectment to recover a mining claim. The case was tried before a jury, who, under the instruction of the Court, returned a verdict for the plaintiff. It seems that one Matte-son, in 1853, was possessed of a certain piece of mining ground, and in consideration of a note made by one Head and one Flippen, with one Grier as surety, in July of the same year, executed and delivered a bill of sale of the ground to Head and Flippen, jointly. Evidence was offered, in the course of the trial, tending to show, if…
1Opinion of the Court
The instructions were erroneous.
1st. Because thereby the jury was required to regard “ a bill of sale ” for a mining claim in the light of a negotiable instrument, and the purchaser in good faith, from the holder of such bill of sale of the land mentioned in the same, in like position with, and with like rights to, an endorser in good faith of a bill of exchange.
The doctrine of caveat emptor is entirely ignored in the instructions, and the whole case made to turn with the jury upon the question whether the purchaser Clark had notice that his grantor had no title.
The instructions required the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Jackson ex dem. M'Crackin v. WrightNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Dupont v. WerthemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Barroilhet v. BattelleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Haskell v. McHenryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1854
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Wilson v. San Francisco-Oakland & Terminal RailwaysCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920