Hamilton v. Eden Gold Mining Co.

1 Ga. L. Rep. 200
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 1, 1885
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ga. L. Rep. 200 (Hamilton v. Eden Gold Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hamilton v. Eden Gold Mining Co., 1 Ga. L. Rep. 200 (Ga. 1885).

Opinion

Blandford, J.

1. Whether in a deed to land a clause reserving to tlm grantor all minerals and mining privileges thereon constitutes a reservation or exemption, and whether it would be void as being a sav'ing as large as the grant, is not decided, because the question was not argued before this court; Shep. Touch., 80; 7 W. & S., 184.

2. Under the facts of this case, there was no error in refusing to grant an injunction to restrain one who held under the grantee of a [201]*201deed containing such a provision from using certain water on the land and a certain mill, for pounding and washing ore taken by him from an adjacent lot. No harm can come to the complainant thereby; and it is directed that the case be held for a full and final trial before the court and jury.

J. S. James; P. H. Brewster; C. D. Camp, for plaintiff in error. Thomas W. Latham; A. I. Bartlett, for defendants.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Shoenberger v. Lyon
7 Watts & Serg. 184 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1844)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Ga. L. Rep. 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-eden-gold-mining-co-ga-1885.