Home/Supreme Court of Colorado/Rico-Argentine Mining Co. v. Rico Consolidated Mining Co.

Rico-Argentine Mining Co. v. Rico Consolidated Mining Co.

74 Colo. 444
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedOctober 1, 1923
DocketNo. 10,324
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 74 Colo. 444 (Rico-Argentine Mining Co. v. Rico Consolidated Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rico-Argentine Mining Co. v. Rico Consolidated Mining Co., 74 Colo. 444 (Colo. 1923).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Sheafor

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendants in error brought this suit to recover from the plaintiffs in error the value of ore taken by them from within the boundaries of the plaintiffs’ Allegheny lode mining claim, and for injunctive relief. The parties will be designated here as they were in the court below.

The defendants admitted the taking of the ore, .and claimed that they were entitled to the same upon the theory that the apex of the vein, from which the ore was mined, is within their property. The trial was to the court without a jury. Findings were for the plaintiffs that they were entitled to recover the value of the ore taken, and also entitled to the injunctive relief prayed. The defendants bring the case here for review.

[446]*446The position of the parties, more fully stated, is as follows: The ore bodies involved are within the surface boundaries of the plaintiffs’ Allegheny claim. The plaintiffs claim that the ore bodies are connected with the Allegheny vein, which cuts through them, and that the apex of the Allegheny vein is the true apex of the ore bodies in question. They claim that the four lime beds, more particularly hereinafter mentioned, have been mineralized by the Allegheny fissure. A further contention of the plaintiffs is, that the four stopes in the lime beds mark the extreme limits of the mineralization in the lime beds and that the mineralization of the beds proceeds no further than the present stopes; in other words, that the mineralization does not extend above, and to the south of the stopes to the Black Hawk fissure, as contended by the defendants, and they deny the existence of the Black Hawk vein.

The defendants contend that the ores taken from beneath the boundaries of the Allegheny claim, were taken from veins apexing within defendants’ Wide Awake and Black Hawk claims, and belong to defendants by virtue of the dip rights given under the acts of congress. The seniority of the location of defendants’ claims, over plaintiffs’ claim, is admitted. Defendants’ Wide Awake and Black Hawk claims adjoin one another and have a common side line; the Allegheny claim of plaintiffs adjoins defendants’ Black Hawk claim on the easterly side of the latter, and the westerly end line of the Allegheny claim constitutes a part of the easterly side line of the Black Hawk claim. Four different stopes starting at the surface near the center of defendants’ Black Hawk claim, have been sunk in a general easterly direction beyond the easterly side line of the Black Hawk claim and extending into plaintiffs’ Allegheny claim. Plate 1 following will aid to a better understanding of the location of the claims:

[447]*447 fE8MldGTK2O2Tv7MgE9eydkRkQypCxvECz6rA0

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

Related

Fail v. Community Hospital
946 P.2d 573 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1997)
Gold, Silver & Tungsten, Inc. v. Wallace
91 P.2d 975 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 Colo. 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rico-argentine-mining-co-v-rico-consolidated-mining-co-colo-1923.