Davis's Administrator v. Weibbold
Citations
- 139 U.S. 507
- 11 S. Ct. 628
- 35 L. Ed. 238
- 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2403
Syllabus
<p>The provisions of the public town-site laws prohibiting acquisition of title thereunder to mines of the precious metals, and protecting therefrom possessory claims under the mining laws, must be construed in accord with the uniform exception in Federal legislation of mineral lands from grant or sale, and held merely to prohibit passage of title thereunder to mines of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper which are known to exist on the issue of the town-site patent, and to mining claims and possessions then lawfully existing. Such exceptions include only those lands which at the date of the grant are of known sufficient mineral value and extent to justify expenditures for the extraction of the mineral.</p> <p>Town-site patent of earlier date covering same premises embraced in junior mining patent carries the title in absence of proof establishing the known existence of the mine at date of such town-site patent.- The claimant under the town-site patent may offer evidence to prove that the premises were not known to be valuable for minerals at date thereof to .rebut the presumption contra indulged, without proof, solely from the fact of issue of such mineral patent.</p> <p>Exception from the mineral patent of town-site occupancy and improveménts, within recited limitations, is unimportant. A mineral patent carries with it all rights which the law confers, and officers of the Land Department cannot enlarge or diminish those rights by any reservation beyond or differing from those contained in the law.</p> <p>The mining laws provide for exploration and purchase of the mineral lands of the United States, and where prior to town-site patent proceedings-thereunder to acquire title are initiated, th^ same may be prosecuted to completion afterwards. But in absence thereof, on issue of town-site patent and conveyance to individuals thereunder, the premises become private property, and jurisdiction' to grant patents of them under the mining laws no longer exists. While the paten
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- Land Department patents conclusive when assailed collaterally
- Land Department patents conclusive when assailed collaterally
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Field
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
69 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Hardin v. JordanSupreme Court· 1891-05-11· cited 381×
- Burke v. Southern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court· 1914-06-22· cited 174×
- Barden v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court· 1894-05-26· cited 151×
- Andrus v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court· 1980-06-02· cited 112×
- Burfenning v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court· 1896-05-18· cited 90×
- United States v. SweetSupreme Court· 1918-01-28· cited 85×
- Dower v. RichardsSupreme Court· 1894-02-05· cited 81×
- Diamond Coal & Coke Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1914-04-06· cited 52×
- Cosmos Exploration Co. v. Gray Eagle Oil Co.Ninth Circuit· 1901-11-15· cited 43×
- Doyle v. BurnsSupreme Court of Iowa· 1904-04-09· cited 41×
- Johnson v. DrewSupreme Court· 1898-05-31· cited 39×
- King v. McAndrewsEighth Circuit· 1901-10-28· cited 38×
- Moran v. HorskySupreme Court· 1900-05-21· cited 35×
- Standard Oil Co. of California v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1940-01-02· cited 34×
- Last Chance Min. Co. v. Bunker Hill & S. Mining & Concentrating Co.Ninth Circuit· 1904-05-31· cited 29×
- United States v. Standard Oil Company of CaliforniaS.D. California· 1937-08-25· cited 23×
- Walpole v. State Board of Land CommissionersSupreme Court of Colorado· 1917-01-15· cited 23×
- New Dunderberg Min. Co. v. OldEighth Circuit· 1897-03-22· cited 23×
- Ames v. Empire Star Mines Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court· 1941-01-31· cited 20×
- Frazee v. Spokane CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1902-07-28· cited 18×
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Steel v. Smelting Co.Supreme Court· 1882-12-18· cited 256×
- Deffeback v. HawkeSupreme Court· 1885-11-16· cited 165×
- Colorado Coal & Iron Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1887-11-21· cited 121×
- United States v. Iron Silver Mining Co.Supreme Court· 1888-12-17· cited 87×
- McLaughlin v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1883-05-07· cited 23×
Sourced 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.