Legal Opinion
Karnes v. Flint
Washington Supreme Court
Decided August 2, 1929No. 21889. Department OnePublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBeals, J.
This litigation involves the possessory rights to two groups of mining claims in the Mount Constance mining district of Jefferson county, claimed under location notices and relocation notices, posted and filed in compliance, or attempted compliance, with the Federal mining laws and the mining code of this state.
Plaintiff F. A. Karnes, together with one L. A. Wallin, during the year 1918 located, on the south slope of Mount Constance, sixteen lode mining claims, supposed to be valuable for the manganese therein contained, which they designated as the “Elkhorn Group of Mining Claims.” It…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Belk v. MeagherSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Hammer v. Garfield Mining & Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Black v. Elkhorn Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Klopenstine v. HaysUtah Supreme Court · 1899
- Copper Mountain Mining & Smelting Co. v. Butte & Corbin Con. Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1909
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Clark Estate Co. v. GentrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1951
- United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., & Hugh Brown, United States of America v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., and Hugh BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Portland Ass'n of Credit Men, Inc. v. EarleyWashington Supreme Court · 1953
- Tagliani v. ColwellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.