Legal Opinion

Sydney v. Richards

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 16, 1919No. Civ. No. 1914Published

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BUCK, P. J., pro tem.

This is an action to quiet title to a copper mining claim. The defendants Westfall and Beeves filed a disclaimer. The case was tried by the court sitting without a jury, and judgment was for defendant Richards, and plaintiff appeals. The land in question was unoccupied government mineral land and at the trial plaintiff attempted to prove that she had acquired title thereto by two distinct proceedings. First, that on January 1, 1911, she and one Lisenby, through her husband, posted a notice of location upon the ground, and in 1913 performed more than one hundred dollars’…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Green v. GavinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
  2. Batt v. StedmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API