McElligott v. Krogh
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. William E. Colby, and Chickering & Gregory, for Appellants. G. G. Goucher, Newman Jones, and J. S. Larew, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.
This is an action in ejectment brought by plaintiffs, the owners of a mining claim known as th “Granite King,” against the defendants, the owners of another mining claim called the “Live Oak.” These claims join each other, the Live Oak lying to the east of the Granite King as originally staked on the ground; the latter overlapping the former to a considerable extent.
The Live Oak was located October 28, 1898; the Granite King on August 28, 1899, nearly a year later. Neither claim has been patented.
We incorporate herein a copy of the map used in evidence in the case and made part of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Thompson v. SprayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Howeth v. SullengerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Doe v. TylerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Perigo v. ErwinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Utah · 1898
- West Granite Mountain Mining Co. v. Granite Mountain Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chittim v. Belle Fourche Bentonite Products Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1944
- Brown v. LuddyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Bank of South San Francisco v. PikeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Ehrhart v. BowlingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Dalton v. ClarkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.