Bevis v. Markland

Citations

• 130 F. 226
• 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4801

Syllabus

<p>1. Mining Claims — Adverse Claimants — Questions—Issues.</p> <p>Where neither party to a suit to recover possession of land held under conflicting mining claims had acquired a perfect right to a conveyance from the United States, and the requirements of the statutes providing for adverse proceedings and suits for the determination of questions respecting conflicting claims had not been complied with, the only issue determinable in such suit was the right of possession.</p> <p>2. Same — Burden of Proof — Trespass.</p> <p>Where plaintiff and defendants claimed land covered by conflicting mining claims, and defendants had not molested plaintiff, or interfered with his possession or that of his grantor, otherwise than by continuing to hold possession in the same manner as before the attempted laying out of plaintiff’s claim, the burden was on plaintiff to prove that defendants were mere intruders, having no color of title or right to possession.</p> <p>3. Same — Color of Title — Right to Possession.</p> <p>Where, prior to the time plaintiff’s grantor staked out a placer claim on public land, defendants had taken steps to appropriate the same land as a lode claim, and there was some evidence of mineral-bearing rock on the surface, but an entire absence of proof that there was not a vein of metallic ore, such as might be located only as a vein or lode claim, defendants’ right to possession was superior to that acquired by plaintiff.</p>