Britt

This is an action involving the validity of lode mining locations in the Calico Mining District in San Bernardino County. Appellant claims through deeds executed by J. R. Lane and L. B. Lane, his wife, to the Bismark and Veto Mining Claims. Respondent claims under locations which he made in September and October, 1924, of the Argentum No. 1, Argentum No. 2 and Argentum No. 3. While the properties overlap, their boundaries do not correspond. Mrs. Lane made her locations in July, 1925, and it is admitted that if respondent’s locations were valid., appellant’s case must fail as respondent remained in possession and did his - required assessment work on the properties. Appellant virtually concedes that respondent’s locations were valid against the claims of Mrs. Lane and her successor in interest, unless the locations of the Bismark and Veto claims by J. B. Lane on July 1, 1923, were lawful, which would defeat the locations by respondent in 1924.

The trial court concluded that neither Mr. nor Mrs. Lane had lawfully located the claims. The only question necessary for our consideration is whether there is any material and competent evidence in the record supporting this conclusion. If…