Mann

Mann v. Budlong

Good Law
129 Cal. 577·1900 Cal. LEXIS 1027·62 P. 120
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 28, 1900L.A. No. 609.California660 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

This is an action brought by plaintiff to determine his possessory right to a certain quartz mining claim. The defendants pleaded an entry upon the land in question as vacant and unoccupied mineral land, and a compliance upon their part with the laws governing the location 'and working of such a claim. The land is part of a claim admittedly first located by plaintiff and called by him the Ontario mine. Defendants allege a failure by plaintiff for five years preceding the commencement of the action to do the necessary amount of work upon the claim. Their location, which they called the ¡Rawhide mine, takes in about two hundred feet of the south western end oí the Ontario mine. The court’s findings were against plaintiff, who appeals, insisting that there is no evidence to support them.

The validity of the location of the Ontario mine being conceded, the essential question for determination, so far as concerns plaintiff, is whether he had forfeited or abandoned his rights by a failure to comply with the law. As to this, it appears without conflict that plaintiff, besides the Ontario, owned the continuous and overlapping claim known as the Jeanette; that he was driving tunnels on…

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.