MacDonald v. Midland Mining Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtSchottky, J.
This action involves the ownership of a mining claim in Mariposa County known as “Garnet Queen No. 3.” Appellant commenced an action for declaratory relief against respondent and defendants Law, Hudson, Odgers and Toye, hereinafter referred to as the Law group. The defaults of all defendants except respondent were entered, and following a trial the court, sitting without a jury, found that appellant was before the court with unclean hands and therefore not entitled to any relief, and also that the location of the Law group, from whom respondent Midland Mining Company derived its right, was…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Adams v. CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Stock v. PlunkettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Kramer v. SanguinettiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Brown v. MurphyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Pharis v. MuldoonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Molybdenum Corp. of America v. KaseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Kasey v. Molybdenum Corp. of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Claybaugh v. GancarzNevada Supreme Court · 1965
- Smith v. DalyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Pascoe v. RichardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.