Diamond Iron Mining Co. v. Buckeye Iron Mining Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover $7,500 rent under one lease (Exhibit A), and $2,500 rent under another lease (Exhibit B). The substance of the leases is given in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to recover $7,500 rent under one lease (Exhibit A), and $2,500 rent under another lease (Exhibit B). The substance of the leases is given in the opinion. The case having been tried without a jury the court, Belden, J., found, among other facts, that the land described was practically of no value for any purpose unless for mining purposes, that there was no other use or occupation had of the land of any substantial value, and ordered judgment for plaintiff for the amounts claimed by plaintiff. From an order denying defendant’s motion for a new…
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
The evidence in this case more than supports the findings of the trial court. Indeed, there is no substantial conflict in the evidence as to the facts, which were as follows: The plaintiff, being the owner of two 80-acre tracts of land, in April, 1893, executed to the defendant the “mining leases” Exhibits A and B of the complaint, which, so far as here material, are identical in their terms. The land was of no substantial or material value for any purpose unless for mining. Both parties executed these leases on the supposition that the premises contained large quantities of merchantable…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gribben v. AtkinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by17 opinions
- Youngstown Mines Corp. v. ProutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- Mineral Park Land Co. v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- State v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Co. v. GrahamSupreme Court of Virginia · 1919
- Nelson v. Republic Iron & Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.