Legal Opinion
Palmer v. Sunnyside Gold & Development Co.
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided October 13, 1936No. Civil No. 3721PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtBoss, J.
This suit was brought by the Sunnyside Cold and Development Company against the defendants, Sunnyside Consolidated Mines Company, C. H. Palmer, Jr., and Del Parsons, to quiet title to the following g-roup of mines, located in tlie San Francisco Mining District, Mohave County, Arizona:
“Sunnyside, Sunnyside Extention and Sunnyside Extension No. 1, lode mining claims, United States Patent being of record in Book 34 of Deeds at pages 185-188 inclusive.
“Also the Lodestone, Lodestone No. 1, Telluride No. 2, Telluride No. 3, Telluride No. 4, and Green Gold patented claims, and the Golden Queen…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Book v. Justice Min. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1893
- Gore v. McBrayerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Moritz v. LavelleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Hirbour v. ReedingMontana Supreme Court · 1877
- Welland v. HuberNevada Supreme Court · 1873
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Anthony Fargo v. McAlester Fuel Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976