Legal Opinion

Gold, Silver & Tungsten, Inc. v. Wallace

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 10, 1939No. 14,148PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE defendants in error, plaintiffs in the court below, were the owners and lessee of the Gray Copper lode mining claim. The plaintiff in error, defendant below, was the owner of the Fitchburg lode mining claim. The parties will be designated herein as they appeared in the trial court. Plaintiffs alleged that certain ores mined by the defendant, although lying within the lateral boundaries of the latter's Fitchburg claim extended downward, in fact, were extracted from plaintiffs' Gray Copper vein, the apex of which was within the territory covered by their claim. Plaintiffs prayed for…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Book v. Justice Min. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1893
  2. Iron Silver Mining Co. v. CheesmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. Iron Silver Mining Co. v. Mike & Starr Gold & Silver Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
  4. Cheesman v. ShreeveU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado · 1889
  5. Liberty Bell Gold Mining Co. v. Smuggler-Union Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Julius Hyman & Co. v. Velsicol Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1951
  2. Crosby v. WatsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1960
  3. Silver Surprize, Inc. v. Sunshine Mining Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1976
  4. Slide Mines, Inc. v. Denver Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1944
  5. Silver Surprize, Inc. v. Sunshine Mining Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API