Legal Opinion
Walton v. Wild Goose Mining & Trading Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 25, 1903No. 923PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAWLEY, District Judge.
This is an action in ejectment brought by the plaintiff in the court below, defendant in error here, to recover the possession of a certain placer mining claim (designated as claim No. 19), and consisting of 20 acres of land situated on Ophir creek, in Council City Recording District in Alaska. The case was tried before a jury, which found a verdict in favor of the defendant in error for the property described in the complaint, without any damages for the use and detention thereof. Judgment was rendered upon the verdict, from which judgment the plaintiffs in error have…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Belk v. MeagherSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Book v. Justice Min. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1893
- Runkle v. BurnhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Hammer v. Garfield Mining & Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- May v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1949
- Tinkoff v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1936
- Lindsey v. ElkinsWashington Supreme Court · 1929
- Liquid Veneer Corporation v. SmucklerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
- Byrne v. MatczakCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1958
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.