Hartford Iron Mining Co. v. Cambria Mining Co.

45 N.W. 351, 80 Mich. 491, 1890 Mich. LEXIS 668
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedMay 2, 1890
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 45 N.W. 351 (Hartford Iron Mining Co. v. Cambria Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hartford Iron Mining Co. v. Cambria Mining Co., 45 N.W. 351, 80 Mich. 491, 1890 Mich. LEXIS 668 (Mich. 1890).

Opinion

Long, J.

Prior to December 1, 1875, the Teal Lake Iron *492 Mining Company was the owner of lot 5, section 36, in town, ship 48 N., of range 27 W., Marquette county, this State.

On that day the company made and executed to James H. McDonald and R. P. Harriman a mining lease of the west half of said lot. By the terms of this lease the second parties were licensed to enter upon-the lands, and to dig thereon, and mine and carry away therefrom, iron ore, for the term of ten years, they having the exclusive right of mining and to carry away ore, and the right to erect thereon and maintain such buildings and machinery as might be necessary for the thorough' and successful prosecution of said work. This lease further provided that the second parties should not occupy any portion of said lands for the purposes of carrying on any trade, business, or occupation except said mining, or such other work or business as is necessarily incidental thereto. This instrument was duly acknowledged, and recorded in the office of the register of deeds of that county, August 26, 1883. Subsequently, and prior to March 16, 1883, this lease was assigned to the Cambria Mining Company, a corporation, the defendant herein. On March 16, 1883, the lease was extended until December 1, 1895, and the assignment and extension duly recorded.

On June 1, 1887, the Teal Lake Iron Mining Company made and executed a similar lease of the east half of said lot 5 to the Hartford Iron Mining Company, of Milwaukee, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Wisconsin, the plaintiff in this suit. This lease was to continue in force for the period of twelve years from- its date.

This action of trover is brought to recover the value of 5,000 tons of iron ore alleged to have been wrongfully taken by the defendant from the land of the plaintiff. This lot 5 is in the Negaunee iron range, and borders upon Teal lake. The following diagram will show the situation:

*493

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

Related

Lupyan v. Lupyan
397 A.2d 1220 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1979)
Brewer v. Schammerhorn
332 P.2d 526 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1958)
Hoyne v. Schneider
27 P.2d 558 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1933)
Robinson v. Taylor
123 P. 444 (Washington Supreme Court, 1912)
Gunn v. Brower
105 P. 702 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1909)
Ferguson v. Basin Consolidated Mines
93 P. 867 (California Supreme Court, 1908)
Edinger v. Woodke
86 N.W. 397 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1901)
Owen v. Henderson
47 P. 215 (Washington Supreme Court, 1896)
Hartford Iron Mining Co. v. Cambria Mining Co.
53 N.W. 4 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 N.W. 351, 80 Mich. 491, 1890 Mich. LEXIS 668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartford-iron-mining-co-v-cambria-mining-co-mich-1890.