McBurney v. Berry
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from Third District, Jefferson County. The court erred in admitting in evidence the certificate of location of the Julia lode for the following reasons: 1st. It was too indefinite in its description. Faxan v. Barnard, 4 Eed. Reporter, p. J02. 2d. The statement was not sworn to as to all the essential facts. Russell v. Hoyt, 4 Mont. 412. 3d. The verification is not signed by the locator, who only makes his mark, and there is no witness to such mark.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Third District, Jefferson County. The court erred in admitting in evidence the certificate of location of the Julia lode for the following reasons: 1st. It was too indefinite in its description. Faxan v. Barnard, 4 Eed. Reporter, p. J02. 2d. The statement was not sworn to as to all the essential facts. Russell v. Hoyt, 4 Mont. 412. 3d. The verification is not signed by the locator, who only makes his mark, and there is no witness to such mark. The certificate of location of the Julia Gold lode was properly admitted in evidence. The description of the ground was sufficiently…
1Opinion of the CourtCoburn, J.
This is an action of ejectment for the possession of a quartz lode mining claim, known as the Silver King, in an unorganized mining district in Jefferson county. It is stated in the bill of exceptions that the plaintiff, having made out a prima facie case for the jury, rested his case, and thereupon defendant placed upon the witness stand the defendant, who testified that he had located the property in dispute, and identified a certain paper purporting to be a notice of location of the Julia Gold lode, which said notice the defendant then offered in evidence, which is as follows:
“ Notice is…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Butte & Superior Copper Co. v. Clark-Montana Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- O'Donnell v. GlennMontana Supreme Court · 1888
- Butte & Superior Copper Co. v. Clark-Montana Realty Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1918
- Van Buren v. McKinletIdaho Supreme Court · 1901