Show RECENT MINING DECISIONS prepared for the mining review liability of owner of mining claims the owner of mining claims gave an option to purchase the same which was transferred by the holder to a corporation which took possession located adjoining claims and employed men to develop the claims the owner knew that the men did work on claims included in the option and assured the laborers that in his opinion the mines were good for the money and stated that if the corporation did not pay the men should not lose their money even if he had to sell or work the mine or have some one else work it but he did not promise expressly to pay the wages of any of the men to whom he talked and no one of the men testified that the work was continued in reliance on the statement made by the owner the continuance of the work was a benefit to the owner and his property held field that the owner was not personally liable to the men for the work performed harper v independence development co supreme court of arizona pacific option on mining claims A contract to convey mining claims for a specified sum in cash and specified payments in one and two years stipulating that the purchaser or his assigns may take possession of the claims and develop them during the life of the agreement and that the purchaser agrees to abide by the terms of the agreement and in def default ault of any of the payments to surrender the property to the owner and forfeit all moneys paid and expended is a mere option to purchase for the purchaser is left to his election within the life of the agreement lo 10 to purchase or to forfeit his rights harper v independence development co supreme court of arizona pacific claims of laborers where an owner cf mining property gives an option to another who enters and works it employing laborers to perform the work no indebtedness is established in favor of the miners against the owner and no lien is fastened on his interest in the property because the work is not performed by virtue of any employment from the owner and the holder of the option is neither a vendee nor an agent of the owner harper v independence development co supreme court of arizona pacific end lines that the end lines of a mining claim are not parallel does not invalidate the location but only affects rights gibson v hjul supreme court of nevada pas discovery shaft though ore was not discovered in a so called discovery shaft on a mining claim it is enough that the locator subsequently found valuable ore in other workings on the claim and where ore was unquestionably discovered did work more than the equivalent of that required jor for a discovery shaft gibson v hjul supreme court of nevada pacific notice of location A notice of location of a mining claim while not answering the requirements of comp laws sec for a certificate of location and so not evidence of an act of location is admissible in support of a claim of adverse possession and to explain testimony gibson v hjul supreme coart of nevada pacific safe place to work where miners were employed to drill and remove rock in a mine the work being so arranged that blasting was done while they were absent giving an opportunity to remedy the dangers resulting by gases generated and the effect of the explosions on the roofs and walls it was the masters duty to make the place reasonably safe before requiring the miners to go back to work and the rule that where the servant is engaged where the conditions are from time to time changing and the place being changed by the work of the servant and his co servants the master need only furnish such a reasonably safe place as the necessary hazards of the employment will permit and exercise such care to provide a safe place to perform the service as the character of the work done will justify does not apply rowden v walton mining co kansas city court of appeals southwestern rights of co owners of claims the provisions of rev st sec 2324 U S comp st 1901 p 1426 respecting the rights of co owners of mining claims where some of such owners have done all the assessment work thereon have no application to mining property situated in a foreign country gaines v chew U S circuit court eastern district of missouri federal |