Show RECENT MINING DECISIONS prepared expressly for the mining review foreclosure of lien on claim where a seller of an interest in certain mining claims retained title to the buyers interest to secure payment of the price the vendor was entitled to foreclose the lien so retained on the purchasers default as provided by rev st idaho 1887 sections and and to recover a deficiency judgment against the purchaser on the failure of his interest to sell for enough to satisfy the debt ferguson vs TL U S circuit court of appeals ninth circuit federal reported 98 validity of location where the discovery of mineral bearing vein is made on land subject to location that the corners were not placed on land subject to location does not render the location entirely void but it is valid to the extent that such location is within the marked boundaries and on land mcelligott vs krogh S supreme supreme court of california 90 pacific reporter location void as to excess where a mining location made in good faith includes withie its boundaries more than rev st U S section 2320 U S comp st 1901 1 p 1424 permits being feet on each side of the middle of the vein at the surface it is void only to the extent of the excess mcelligott vs krogh supreme court ot california 90 pacific reporter establishment of line on corrected corner under rev st U S section 2320 U S comp st 1904 p 1424 declaring that no minin mining g claim shall exceed more than feet on each side of the middle of the vein at the surface though locators did not place a monument at an intervening on the line between the end monuments ilie lits as under their mistaken bellef belief as to the accuracy of the location of the end monuments there could be no necessity for it yet they were entitled to have a line established on the correction of the location of one of the end monuments which would include the corrected corner that point and the original corner not corrected where no part of such line was more than feet from the middle of the vein on the correction of this corner the court was not required to fix the boundary line as a Et straight raight line between the corner corrected and the original corner not corrected mcelligott vs krogh 1 supreme court of california 90 pacific reporter 82 mining partnership it if two or more owners of a mine unite in working it without any partnership agreement the act ot working it together creates a mining partnership ner ship and the same is true of two or more holding interests in a lease of mining property kirchner vs smith supreme court of appeals of west virginia 58 southeastern suit for contribution from mining partners in a chancery suit sui t for contribution against his co partners by a partner in a mining partnership for n money ioney he be has pid paid for such partnership when lie he has recovered against them individually certain Q sums in proportion to their respective interests in the partnership it is not error to retain the cause on the docket for further decrees against defendants for contribution in cise case plaintiff should fail to make on execution or 0 otherwise L the severa several I 1 amounts so recovered kirchner vs smith supreme court of appeals of west virginia 58 southeastern purchase of outstanding title of claim A contract for the sale of certain mining claims obligated the vendor to deliver a warranty deed conveying a perfect title to the entire claims two months prior to the date fixed for the payment of the price the purchasers assignee in possession discovered an alleged outstanding title to an interest previously owned by the vendors cotenant co tenant which such purchasers assignee purchased zd held that the purchase of such outstanding title inured to the benefit of the vendor and such assignee was not entitled to possession as a tenant in common without paying the contract price but was only entitled to claim reimbursement from the vendor for the amount paid for such outstanding title with interest garvey vs lashells supreme court of california 9 |