Glass v. Basin Mining & Concentrating Co.
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County/ Framh Showers, Judge. Action by James Glass and another, composing the firm of Glass Bros., against the Basin Mining & Concentrating Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. We contend that under our statute it is not necessary to ah lege an attempt to agree. It will be observed that this writ was instituted previous to July 1st, 1895, and is governed by the law as it stood at that time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County/ Framh Showers, Judge. Action by James Glass and another, composing the firm of Glass Bros., against the Basin Mining & Concentrating Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. We contend that under our statute it is not necessary to ah lege an attempt to agree. It will be observed that this writ was instituted previous to July 1st, 1895, and is governed by the law as it stood at that time. There are two statutes relative to the exercise of eminent domain. The first a general statute applicable to all purposes for which private…
1Per curiam
Proceeding by respondents (plaintiffs) to acquire a right of way over certain lands belonging to appellant (defendant) for a ditch to carry water to plaintiffs’ mining plant in J efferson county.
It is conceded that the Compiled Statutes of 1887 control. The petition alleges that petitioners own certain mining property and a certain water right; that their mining claim was so situated that it could not be conveniently worked without a flume or ditch to convey water for power purposes for a mill and concentrator of plaintiffs; that defendant is the owner of certain premises; and- that to convey…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Butte, Anaconda & Pacific Railway Co. v. Montana Union Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1895
- Lieberman v. Chicago & South Side Rapid Transit RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. Cincinnati, Wabash & Michigan Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Matter of Lockport and Buffalo R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Toledo, Ann Arbor & North Michigan Railway Co. v. Detroit, Lansing & Northern RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Bremerton Bridge Co. v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1938
- Application of Loup River Public Power Dist.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1953
- Montana Talc Co. v. Cyprus Mines Corp.Montana Supreme Court · 1987
- State Ex Rel. McMaster v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1927
- State Ex Rel. Rich v. BairIdaho Supreme Court · 1961
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.