Harris

Harris v. Kellogg

Good Law
117 Cal. 484·1897 Cal. LEXIS 687·49 P. 708
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 8, 1897Sac. No. 192California1,456 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The plaintiffs brought this action to recover from the defendants the possession of a mining claim, and to restrain them from committing waste *487 thereon. The cause was tried by the court, and findings were made sustaining the allegations of the complaint, and judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. Upon motion of the defendants a new trial was afterward granted, and from this order the plaintiffs have appealed.

In the statement upon motion for a new trial the only errors assigned are the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision, and the particular specifications of this insufficiency are:

1. The evidence fails to show that plaintiffs or any of them were or are citizens of the United States, or had bona fide declared their intention to become such citizens, or that they are or were ever at any time qualified or entitled to locate any public land as a mining claim.

2. The evidence shows that the plaintiffs have not filed or caused to be filed in the office of the county recorder of Madera county, or with the recorder of Fresno mining district, an affidavit or statement showing the amount or value of work done on the claim in controversy at any time.

The…

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.