Show RECENT MINING DECISIONS prepared for the mining review shift boss a vice principal where a shift boss of a mine superintended super intended the timbering he was the vice principal of the master and his negligence was negligence of the master and hence a servant having been injured by the collapse of timbering evidence of the duties of the shift boss was admissible to show that he was a vice prin cipal kinsel v north butte mining co supreme court of montana pacific patent on mineral land an applicant for patent to mineral lands is not required require I to do annual assessment work after making and submitting his final proofs on his patent application and the acceptance and allowance of the same and the issuance to him of a receivers receipt from the local land office in conformity with the statute and the rules and regulations of the general land office batterton v douglas mining co limited supreme court of idaho pacific injury to miner where a miner was engaged in timbering a mine to render it safe for others and the timbers placed therein during his absence were negligently fixed so that they collapsed and injured him the master was liable although the ml miner ner was engaged in making the place safe if the defective conditions surrounding the place in which the miner worked were the proximate result of a negligent plan of work adopted by the master kinsel v notah butte mining co supreme court of montana pacific location of claim under the provisions of section 2332 of the revised statutes of the united states U S comp st 1901 p 1433 the claimant to mineral lands of the united states who has been in the open exclusive adverse possession of a claim for a continuous period equal to that required by the local statute of limitations governing adverse possession of real estate is relieved of the necessity of making proof of posting and recording a notice of location and such other proofs as are usually furnished by the county recorder or in other words he is relieved of furnishing the evidence of record title humphreys v idaho gold miens development co supreme court of idaho pacific conversion of ore plaintiff agreed to purchase a mine from the owner under an agreement providing that payment should be made out of the proceeds of the mine and sale of plaintiffs capital stock and that it should take possession and wore borr the mine for that purpose and the deed was deposited in escrow to be delivered to plaintiff when the price was paid but the agreement was subject to cancellation upon plaintiffs failure for three months to perform any covenant in the contract held that plaintiff could before delivery of the escrow deed to it maintain an action for the value of ore wrongfully taken from the mine lightner mining co v lane hupila supreme me of california pacific |