Legal Opinion
Houck v. Jose
District Court, S.D. California
Decided June 14, 1947No. 703PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YANKWICH, District Judge.
By their complaint, Stanley B. Houck and others seek to quiet title to sixteen placer mining claims containing deposits of montmorillonite, all located in Imperial County, California, and being in Township 14 South, Range 12 East, San Bernardino Base arid Meridian.
At the trial I expressed doubt whether one who has no greater interest than a mining location could bring an action to quiet title. A further study of the problem has led me to the conclusion that the action is maintainable under the recognized principle that one who is in the process of acquiring a title to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Smelting Co. v. KempSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Fox Film Corp. v. DoyalSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Cole v. RalphSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Gauthier v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Baker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Baker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Flynn v. VevelstadDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1954
- Atherley v. Bullion Monarch Uranium CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1959