Chambers v. Harrington
Citations
- 111 U.S. 350
- 4 S. Ct. 428
- 28 L. Ed. 452
- 1884 U.S. LEXIS 1790
Syllabus
<p>Jurisdiction — Mineral Lands.</p> <p>The decision of a court of competent jurisdiction upon adverse claims to a patent for mineral lands under §§ 2325, 2326 Rev. Stat. is subject to review in this court when the amount in controversy is sufficient.</p> <p>When several adjoining claims to mineral lands are held in common, work for the benefit of all done upon any one of them in a given year to an amount equal to that required to be done upon all in that year meets the requirements of § 2824 Rev. Stat. The language of the court in Jackson v. Roby, 109 U. S. 440, cited and approved.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Clearly, the purpose was ... to require every person who asserted an exclusive right to his discovery or claim to expend something of labor or value on it as evidence of his good faith and to show that he was not acting on the principle of the dog in the manger.”
- “The purpose [of section 28] was ... to require every person who asserted an exclusive right to his discovery or claim, to expend something of labor or value on it as evidence of his good faith, and to show that he was not acting on the principle of the dog in the manger.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Miller
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.