Empire State-Idaho Mining & Developing Co. v. Bunker Hill & Sullivan Mining & Concentrating Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Idaho.
1Opinion of the Court
ROSS, Circuit Judge.
This was an action of ejectment, in which the defendant in error was plaintiff in the court below, brought for the recovery of certain underground portions of a vein or lode alleged to have its apex within the surface lines of a mining claim called the “King,” which vein or lode, it is alleged in the complaint, in its course crosses the end lines of that claim. The incidental question of damages, for which the plaintiff also sued, has been, by stipulation of the respective parties, ■ withdrawn from present consideration. The case was tried without a jury, and resulted in…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Stanley v. Supervisors of AlbanySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Cosmos Exploration Co. v. Gray Eagle Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1901
- Nevada Sierra Oil Co. v. Home Oil Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1899
- Hosmer v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Distilling & Cattle Feeding Co. v. Gottschalk Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1895
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Lawson v. United States Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Last Chance Min. Co. v. Bunker Hill & S. Mining & Concentrating Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1904
- United States Min. Co. v. DawsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Empire State-Idaho Mining & Developing Co. v. Bunker Hill & S. Mining & Concentrating Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1903
- McIntosh v. PriceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1903
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.