Legal Opinion

Steinman Development Co. v. W. M. Ritter Lumber Co.

District Court, W.D. Virginia

Decided June 5, 1922PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

I. Timber for Mining Purposes.

McDOWELL, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). I shall first consider only the plaintiff’s right to timber for mining purposes. In the copy of the deed from the Wrights to Steinman of 1875, filed with the bill, the clause in question appears as “the right to cut and use timbers.” From an inspection of the same clause in the six deeds to Price & Steinman, filed as exhibits with the deposition of W. M. Lambert, it seems .practically certain that the word “timbers” in the Wright-Steinman deed is a typographical error for “timber.”

Both in-reason and by…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McIntire v. Marian Coal Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1921
  2. Godfrey v. Weyanoke Coal & Coke Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Sun Lumber Co. v. Nelson Fuel Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Kennedy Stave & Cooperage Co. v. Sloss Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1902
  5. Paxton Lumber Co. v. Panther Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1919

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Eureka Real Estate & Investment Co. v. Southern Real Estate & Financial Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1947
  2. State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. TrujilloNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Vogel v. CobbSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
  4. Harper v. Talladega CountySupreme Court of Alabama · 1966
  5. Beck v. HarveySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API