Galbraith v. Shasta Iron Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Shasta County. Edward Sweeny, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Plaintiff upon the tenth day of April, 1899, made a mining location called the Los Angeles Quartz Mine, which location included within its boundaries a portion of the mining ground claimed by defendant. Upon trial of their conflicting rights judgment passed for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
It appears that on the fifteenth day of April, 1882, a patent was issued by the United States government to the California Iron Mining and Smelting Company, for the Pitt River Iron Ore Mine. By mesne conveyance the defendant became the grantee of the patentee’s interest in the mining property un der the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Smelting Co. v. KempSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Paulding v. . the Chrome Steel CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Beecher v. Marquette & Pacific Rolling Mill Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Calhoun Gold Mining Co. v. Ajaz Gold Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Los Angeles Farming & Milling Co. v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Royal Consol. Mining Co. v. Royal Consol. Mines (Cal.) Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
- Weaver v. HowattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Clear Lake Power & Improvement Co. v. ChriswellIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Estate of Garnier v. SarrailleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Williamson v. PrattCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918