Gelcich v. Moriarty

53 Cal. 217, 1878 Cal. LEXIS 115
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1878·No. No. 5697·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

By the Court :

The findings do not show that plaintiff has had the possession of any definite part of the mining ground in controversy, and plaintiff is therefore noi entitled to a decree based on his actual possession of any specific portion.

Nor dó the findings show that either jiarty has acquired title under the Act of Congress of May 10th, 1872; both parties having attempted to make location after the passage of that' act, and both having failed to distinctly mark their locations on the ground so that the boundaries can be readily traced.

Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gelcich v. Moriarty, 53 Cal. 217, 1878 Cal. LEXIS 115 (Cal. 1878).

53 Cal. 217 (Gelcich v. Moriarty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Flynn v. Kalamazoo Circuit Judge
101 N.W. 222 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1904)
German-American Savings Bank v. City of Spokane
38 L.R.A. 259 (Washington Supreme Court, 1897)
People v. Goldenson
19 P. 161 (California Supreme Court, 1888)
Lebanon Mining Co. v. Consolidated Republican Mining Co.
6 Colo. 371 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1882)
Gonu v. Russell
3 Mont. 358 (Montana Supreme Court, 1879)