Murray Hill Mining & Milling Co. v. Havenor
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from the Fifth District Court, Juab County. — Hon. E. V. Higgins, Judge. Tbe defendants, having applied in the United States land office for a patent of the Havenor mining claim, and the plaintiff company having filed a protest and adverse claim, this suit was instituted by the plaintiff to determine the right of possession of the premises. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBaskin, J.
The appellants, having. applied in the United States land office at Salt Lake City for a patent of the Havenor mining claim, and the respondent having filed in said office a protest and adverse claim, this suit was instituted by the respondent, in pursuance of section 2326 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, to determine the question of *75tbe right of possession of, the premises adversely claimed by respondent. Tbe application of tbe appellants was for a patent of tbe Havenor, wbicb was located on or about tbe fourteenth of February, 1899, and embraces a portion of tbe Murray Hill,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dickerson v. ColgroveSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
3Cited by11 opinions
- Orion Reserves Ltd. Partnership v. SalazarCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2009
- Tosco Corp. v. HodelDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1985
- Featherman v. HennessyMontana Supreme Court · 1911
- Vaught v. PettyjohnSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
- Nevada Exploration & Mining Co. v. SpriggsUtah Supreme Court · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.