Weber

Weber v. Alabama-California Gold Mines Co.

Good Law
121 F.2d 663·1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 3294
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 11, 1941No. 9750California691 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haney, J.

Appellants H. C. Weber and Sherwell G. Weber brought an action to quiet title to an interest in mining property. Appellant Shupak also brought an action to quiet title to another interest in such property. Each action was brought against the corporate appellee and Anderson. Anderson did not defend the actions, which were tried together. Judgments were entered for the corporate appellee. Hence this appeal.

In December, 1932, Anderson, Shupak, and one Mark U. Weber held a meeting, and it was decided that Anderson would go to Arizona to examine some mining property there. Subsequently Anderson went to Arizona, and on his trip back examined a mine near Sacramento, California, known as the Alabama mine. At that time, there were six owners of the rights in such mine subsequently acquired in the name of Anderson. Anderson, Shupak and Weber decided to lease the property. The lease and bond, as the conveyance has been called, was executed on May 15, 1933, to Anderson alone, at the request of Shupak and Mark Weber.

The lease and bond provided that before the vendors could declare a forfeiture thereof, they must give the vendee 30 days’ written notice. The mine was thereafter operated…

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.