Show LATEST MINING DECISIONS prepared for the alining review by Law laurener Lawren rener cf shoup attorneys sat lake city abandonment abandons nm ent relocation wh where ere a mining claim was purchased on december 26 1890 and thereafter abandoned because the burch purchaser hager moer way vai unable to do the assessment work for that year and the purchasers son relocated as an abandoned claim on january 30 1891 giving the date of discovery as december 20 1890 the relocation was held invalid and did not dot prevent relocation by others niles vs kerman kennan colo 62 pac same where the claim was subsequently transferred to the original owner of the abandoned claim and he claims solely under the relocation until after the plaintiff had located an interfering lode held that defendant could not recall his abandonment and claim that the relocation was to protect his riz rights ats under tinder the original claim ib trespass injunction unc tion wh where ere in an action to enjoin defendant from trespassing tres passing on a mining ino claim and destroying plaintiffs end gates ditches etc the only evidence of trespass was that on one occasion one of the defendants came and commenced digging on a ditch and refused to go go when ordered saying that he was going to pull up plaintiffs gates and take the water they were using the complaint was properly dismissed since an injunction to restrain trespass on a mining t claim will not issue on proof of a single act of trespass parker vs furlon furlong g ore 62 pac parole license in an action for da damages magres occasioned by defendant flooding debris down on plaintiffs placer mine from defendants mine which was situated just above p plaintiffs lain mine on the same creek defendant claimed to do so by virtue of a license from plaintiff and alleged that on the strength of such license he had made valuable improvements clua C lua on his own claim but did not show that fie he had paid anything for the license or that lie he had not been repaid for his improvements by the operation of his own mine held that the license was revocable and did not constitute a defense to the action miser aliser v oshea et etal al ore 62 pac |