Adams v. Yukon Gold Co.
District Court, D. Alaska
The trial of this action was begun at the special July, 1915, term of court at Iditarod, before the court, without a jury.
Read the full summary
The trial of this action was begun at the special July, 1915, term of court at Iditarod, before the court, without a jury. Testimony was introduced by both the plaintiff and the defendants, and upon stipulation of counsel the trial was continued to the special term of court at Ruby, adjourned to August, 1915. An order was duly entered transferring the cause to the Ruby calendar, and trial of the action having been completed on the 16th day o.f August, the court reserved decision. The plaintiff in his complaint alleges that, by reason of good and subsisting locations thereof as placer mining…
1Opinion of the Court
BUNNEEE, District Judge.
The plaintiff, Adams, testified in substance that, after having ascertained the Prospector Association claim as stated to be in excess of 160 acres, he went to two of the co-owners of the claim and notified them of his intention to stake such excess; that they thereupon gave their1 consent to plaintiff to stake such excess from either end or side. It was shown that the remaining co-owners, some of whom were in the immediate vicinity, were not advised of the consent given by the two co-owners to Adams; that this act *394had by them neither been previously authorized nor…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Barson v. . MulliganNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- McKinley ex rel. Orr v. PetersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
- O'Hanlon v. Ruby Gulch Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1913
- Jones v. Wild Goose Mining & Trading Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1910
- Hanson v. CraigCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.