Whildin

Whildin v. Maryland Gold Quartz Mining Co.

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 322·33 Cal. App. 270·164 P. 908·164 P.2d 908
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 21, 1917Civ. No. 1630.California3,441 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

The action was one to quiet plaintiffs’ title to a small parcel of mining ground lying easterly of and adjoining the surface boundaries of defendant Eureka Gold Mining Company’s patented land, known as the Eureka quartz mine. The land claimed by plaintiffs is designated as East Eureka quartz mine, and is an irregular shaped parcel surrounded on all sides by patented mining claims. Plaintiffs claim that, on the fifth day of September, 1897, the land embraced within the exterior boundaries of the East Eureka quartz mine was public mineral land of the United States, open to exploration and purchase; that, on said date, one Stephen Maynard, a citizen of the United States and the predecessor of the plaintiffs in interest, having discovered a lode or vein of gold-bearing rock in place within the exterior boundaries of said parcel of land, made a valid mining location of said parcel, to be known as the East Eureka quartz mine, that the labor and improvements necessary in order to hold said mining claim under the federal mining laws were done and performed each year by said Maynard and the plaintiffs as his successors in interest. There is no controversy as to the technical formality of…

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.