Brandt v. Wheaton
California Supreme Court
The complaint, which was filed September 30th, 1875, averred that the plaintiff was, and had been since 1864, the owner and possessor of a mining claim in the Michigan Bluff District, County of Placer, lying in Buchanan Gulch, and that the defendant wrongfully claimed to own it, and had applied to the United States, in the Land Office at Sacramento, to obtain a patent for it, and that his application was now pending, and that the claim was a placer-mining claim, and a part…
Read the full summary
The complaint, which was filed September 30th, 1875, averred that the plaintiff was, and had been since 1864, the owner and possessor of a mining claim in the Michigan Bluff District, County of Placer, lying in Buchanan Gulch, and that the defendant wrongfully claimed to own it, and had applied to the United States, in the Land Office at Sacramento, to obtain a patent for it, and that his application was now pending, and that the claim was a placer-mining claim, and a part of the public mineral lands of the United States. The plaintiff asked for judgment decreeing that he was the owner and…
1Opinion of the Court
This is a suit in equity, and yet the Court rendered judgment on the general verdict of a jury.
The action cannot be maintained. The complaint charges that the defendant is seeking to purchase the land from the United States. This he had a right to do under the Acts of Congress. (See secs. 2325 and 2326 of the Bevised Statutes of the United States.)
The complaint nowhere attempts to say or show that the defendant’s' application to purchase was not fairly and legally made, nor that he had not acquired an actual right of purchase binding upon the United States under its existing law.
The land…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Boggs v. Merced Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
- Curtis v. SutterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Head v. FordyceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Crandall v. WoodsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Hughes v. DevlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Holland v. HotchkissCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Montana Ore Purchasing Co. v. Boston & Montana Consolidated Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1902
- Gavina v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Benson v. ShotwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Orr v. StewartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.