Galbraith

Galbraith v. Shasta Iron Co.

Good Law
143 Cal. 94·1904 Cal. LEXIS 784·76 P. 901
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 27, 1904Sac. No. 1044.California2,178 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

Plaintiff upon the tenth day of April, 1899, made a mining location called the Los Angeles Quartz Mine, which location included within its boundaries a portion of the mining ground claimed by defendant. Upon trial of their conflicting rights judgment passed for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

It appears that on the fifteenth day of April, 1882, a patent was issued by the United States government to the California Iron Mining and Smelting Company, for the Pitt River Iron Ore Mine. By mesne conveyance the defendant became the grantee of the patentee’s interest in the mining property un der the patent. On the third day of October, 1898, the commissioner of the land department of the United States rendered his decision in relation to a certain mining application, and caused this respondent to be notified of an error in the description of its mining patent. This error consisted in an erroneous length given to the line connecting the Pitt mine to a government corner, so that if this connecting-line alone were considered it would place the claim about a quarter of a mile from its actual location upon the ground. Defendant took immediate steps to have this error corrected according to…

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.