Chichagoff Extension Gold Mining Co. v. Alaska-Handy Gold Mining Co.

Good Law
45 F.2d 553·5 Alaska Fed. 588·1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 3684
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 6, 1930No. 6183California1,712 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

This suit was brought in the District Court for the purpose of having determined alleged rights of the Alaska-Handy Gold Mining Company in land included in certain mining claims in Alaska, as to the greater part of which the Chichagoff Extension Gold Mining Company had applied for patent. Section 2326, Rev.St.(30 uAc.A. § 30), authorizes such a suit where adverse claim is made against a patent application. The District Court made its decision that neither party was entitled to prevail.

There is an appeal by the Chichagoff .Company and a cross-appeal by the Alaska-Handy Company. The respective parties will be hereinafter referred to under the abbreviated forms of their corporate names.

The Alaska-Handy Company acquired rights of the locators of two lode claims called the Handy and the Andy prior to the time that the dispute with which the action is concerned arose. It alleged in its complaint that all required assessment work had been done upon the claims except that required- for the year from July 1, 1923, to July 1, 1924, during which period, it was alleged, no assessment work was done because plaintiff was prevented from going on the property by one Tarbill, who represented…

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.