Ghost v. United States
Citations
- 168 F. 841
- 94 C.C.A. 253
- 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4507
Syllabus
<p>1. Appeal and Error (§§ 256, 518'*) — Record—Matters to be Siiown — Motions to Strike out Portions of a Pleading.</p> <p>A motion to strike out portions of an answer and the ruling thereon cannot ho regarded as part of the record, upon a writ of error, unless made such by a bill of exceptions; nor is the ruling upon such a motion open to review where no exception thereto was taken.</p> <p>[Eel. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 1489, 2352; Dec. Dig. §§ 256, 518.*)</p> <p>2. Courts (§ 356*) — Courts of the United States — Proceedings Preparatory to Obtaining Review of Rulings Not Regulated by State Statutes.</p> <p>In the courts of the United States the proceedings preparatory to obtaining a review of their ruling's, including the questions of when an exception need lie taken and how motions and rulings, not in themselves part of the record, may be made such, are not regulated by state statutes, but by the statutes of the United States, and, if they he silent, by the common law and the practice prevailing in those courts.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. § 937; Dec. Dig. § 356.*]</p> <p>3. Mines and Minerals (§ 7*) — Coal Dand Statute — Eight to Coal Incidentally Removed in Course of Lawful Development Work.</p> <p>Under sections 2347-2852, Rev. St. (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, pp. 1440, 1441), a qualified individual or association who, in responso to the government’s invitation, enters upon public lands in search of coni deposits, and expends time, labor, and means in an honest effort to open and develop-such deposits when found, intending to purchase the lands according to the statute if the coal proves to be such as to give character and value to them, is not a trespasser, but is in the exercise of a privilege conferred by law, and is entitled to such coal as is extracted and removed as-an incident only 1o the reasonable prosecution of that work.</p> <p>TEd. Note. — For other cases, see Mines and Minerals, Cent. D
Judges: Cii, Cuit, Devanter, Philips, Sanborn
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Liberty Bell Gold Mining Co. v. Smuggler-Union Mining Co.Eighth Circuit· 1913-03-03· cited 20×
- Ana Maria Sugar Co. v. QuinonesFirst Circuit· 1918-06-06· cited 16×
- Connecticut Fire Ins. v. ManningEighth Circuit· 1910-03-14· cited 14×
- Cusamano v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1936-08-03· cited 8×
- Flanagan v. BensonEighth Circuit· 1929-12-31· cited 7×
- Wainer v. United StatesSeventh Circuit· 1937-01-06· cited 5×
- Momand v. Paramount Publix Corp.Tenth Circuit· 1937-02-26· cited 3×
- Schneider v. KesslerThird Circuit· 1937-05-10· cited 2×
Cites
12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Stone v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1897-05-10· cited 194×
- St. Clair v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1894-05-26· cited 193×
- Colorado Coal & Iron Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1887-11-21· cited 121×
- The Chateaugay Ore & Iron Co.Supreme Court· 1888-12-10· cited 103×
- United States v. CookSupreme Court· 1874-05-18· cited 95×
- Shiver v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1895-11-11· cited 70×
- United States v. Denver & Rio Grande RailroadSupreme Court· 1903-11-09· cited 67×
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. LewisSupreme Court· 1896-04-13· cited 43×
- Metropolitan Railroad v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court· 1904-11-28· cited 42×
- Francisco v. Chicago & A. R.Eighth Circuit· 1906-11-23· cited 26×
- Evans v. StettnischSupreme Court· 1893-05-10· cited 19×
- United States v. Ute Coal & Coke Co.Eighth Circuit· 1907-12-27· cited 16×
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.