Show RE RECENT CENT MINING DECISIONS prepared for the mining review option to rescind purchase where a contract provided that if the purchaser should at the end of three years be dissatisfied with an interest in mining property he keeping up his share of assessment work the vendor would return the purchase money the purchaser may recover subject to deduction for assessment work though he did not pay the assessment for the third year it appearing that the work had not been done and that the vendor made no demand for the ass assessment es mcdougall vs oconnell supreme court of washington pacific conversion of ore in an action of trespass tor for the removal and conversion of ore from a mine where the taking is admitted or proved it is presumed that the trespass was willful and intentional and the burden of proof rests on the defendant to establish the contrary by a preponderance af pf of evidence and this rule applies although the ore was taken from a vein of precious metal under a mining clairn claim where rights may exist in owners of other clai claims ins liberty be 1 l gold min ingco vs smuggler union mining co U S circuit court of appeals federal lien on mine an equitable lien acquired on mining property in the united states owned by an engish eng ish corporation for the operation and development of the property cannot be displaced by debentures issued by the company in england as authorized by the companies act of 1862 st 25 26 viet vict c 89 which by the english law create a floating charge only not restricting or interfering with the power of the company to prosecute the business for which it was organized in a foreign country and to its property there situated in the ordinary course of business while it is a going concern to one having no notice orf the debentures pearson vs harris U S circuit court of appeals SOO 00 federal 10 relocation of mine defendant who had located some mines induced others to organize a company and advance money to take over the locations and while defendant was in possession of the property for the company and knew that its off officers leers were depending on him for advice as to the management of the mine he relocated it for his own use in his own name and did the development work thereon with the ulterior motive of compelling the company to give him a right to the water from the mine for irrigation purposes which it had previously refused to do held that the relocation of the mine inured to the benefit of the company whose agent defendant was in view of his fiduciary relation to the company operative cooperative co copper gold mining co vs law supreme court of oregon pacific discovery workings under laws 1907 c 22 amending chiv code 1901 par providing that the location of an abandoned or forfeited mining c aim shall be in accordance cor dance with chiv code 1901 1901 par except that the may perform his relocation work by sinking the original shaft ten feet deeper or extending the tunnel and under nara paragraph graph as amended by laws 1903 no 90 sec 21 providing that failure to do such things shall work a forfeiture of the claim the re locators of a mining claim could not legally adopt the dis coverd workings of the prior location and an attempt to relocate by the adoption of such workings would be abortive peachy vs gaddis supreme court of arizona pacific |