Stockton v. Santa Paula Oil Co.

Caution
1923 Cal. App. LEXIS 116·64 Cal. App. 384·221 P. 661
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 14, 1923Civ. No. 4354.California868 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Houser, J.

In form this action is a quiet-title suit between adverse claimants to mineral land, and, as is admitted by counsel representing the respective parties hereto, the ultimate question for determination by the trial court was simply which of them was entitled to priority. Plaintiffs claim under an original location made in 1910, while the defendant claims under locations made in 1916. Assuming that plaintiffs’ location was made in accordance with the law, based upon a “discovery” and followed by a compliance with the law regulating the performance of the required assessment work after such location, it would result that any subsequent location made by the defendant would necessarily yield to plaintiffs’ prior rights.

The right of any claimant, first to the possession of public mineral land and ultimately to ownership thereof through the medium of a patent therefor issued by the United States government, rests primarily on the discovery of a mineral deposit of such value as would justify a man of ordinary prudence in expending sufficient money for its development'; and, secondarily, upon the performance by the claimant of the development work required by the statute. (Donnelly v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.