Legal Opinion

C. F. Pruess, Sr., Er Al. v. Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 22, 1969No. 23347_1Published

1Per curiam

This appeal is taken from the District Court’s judgment upholding the decision of the Secretary of the Interior that appellants’ mining claims were invalid for lack of location of valuable minerals. The opinion of the District Court appears at 286 F.Supp. 138 (D.Or.1968). We agree with the views there expressed.

Appellants contend that the Secretary applied the wrong test — marketability rather than prudent man — to determine the sufficiency of the location. They distinguish United States v. Coleman, 390 U.S. 599, 88 S.Ct. 1327, 20 L.Ed.2d 170 (1968), on the ground that the Court there dealt…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. ColemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Pruess v. UdallDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API