Newbill v. Thurston
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of San Bernardino, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMyrick, J.
—Ejectment for a portion of a mining claim. The question is whether the location of the plaintiffs was sufficient to entitle them to recover. On the 26th of March, 1881, Newbill, one of the plaintiffs, went upon the ground and posted a notice and erected a discovery monument; no other marks or monuments were then made or erected, but the notice stated that the locator claimed twenty days within which to mark the boundaries and to record the claim. The ground claimed by the notice extended five hundred feet southeasterly, and one thousand feet northerly from the notice. During the ensuing two…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Doe v. Waterloo Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1895
- Sanders v. NobleMontana Supreme Court · 1899
- Johnson v. RyanNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1939
- Pharis v. MuldoonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Patterson v. TarbellOregon Supreme Court · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.