Minnesota Mining Co. v. National Mining Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to the District Court of the Upper Peninsula, for the county of Ontonagon. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Christiancy J.:
This was an action of ejectment, brought by the plaintiffs below (plaintiffs in error) to recover a portion of section sixteen in township fifty north of range thirty-nine west, in the Lake Superior Land District.
The plaintiffs claim under a patent from the United States, issued April 9th, 1852, purporting to convey the lands in question (together with a large • amount of lands on other sections in the same township, not here in controversy). By the evidence in the case, this patent appears to have been issued upon a pre-emption purchase under the act of March 1st, 1847: — 9 U.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cooper v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
3Cited by8 opinions
- State ex rel. Kittel v. JenningsSupreme Court of Florida · 1904
- Sweet v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915
- Keith v. HaggartNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
- Territory v. Choctaw, O. & W. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Busch v. DonohueMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.