Stinchfield v. Gillis
Citations
- 107 Cal. 84
- 40 P. 98
- 1895 Cal. LEXIS 714
Syllabus
<p>Mines—Conveyance by Owner of Two Claims Held as One—Inter, section of Veins—Title of Grantee—Estoppel by Deed.—Where the dividing line between the original locations of two mining claims has been disregarded by one who has become the owner of both of them, and he has sold and conveyed a portion thereof in a deed of conveyance not purporting to be made in accordance with the lines or claim of any previous location, but as a conveyance of a tract of mining ground carved out of the entire tract by metes and bounds agreed upon between the parties, the grantor is estopped by-his deed from questioning the right of his grantee to all of the gold found within the surface lines of the deed, irrespective of the depth below the surface at which it is found and such grantee has title to the gold found at the place of intersection of two veins falling within the surface lines of the deed.</p> <p>Id.—Construction of Revised Statutes—Priority of Location of Intersecting Veins—Effect of Deed.—Where the proprietor of a tract of mining ground which had been derived through several locations disposes of the same in parcels, irrespective of the lines of the locations, the rights of his grantees are measured by the terms of their deeds. Section 2336 of the Revised Statutes of the United States providing that when two veins intersect, priority of title shall govern as to the ore or mineral contained within the space of intersection, has no application to a conveyance of part of a mining claim, in respect to which there is no priority of location, and was not intended to limit or define the rights of a person in possession of a tract of mining ground where there is more than one vein, or to prescribe the effect of a conveyance by the locator of a claim of a portion of his location; but the sole object of that section is to supplement the provisions of section 2332, and to prescribe rules under which different locations by different proprietors should be held, and to determine the right
Judges: Garoutte, Harrison
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.