From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wedekind v. Craig

Supreme Court of California
Nov 1, 1880
56 Cal. 642 (Cal. 1880)

Opinion

[Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]          Department Two

         Rehearing (Denied, Granted) 56 Cal. 642 at 646.

         Appeal from a judgment for defendant, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, in the Fourteenth District Court for the County of Placer. Reardan, J.

         COUNSEL:

         J. P. Dameron, and Rhodes & Barstow, for Appellant.

          C. A. Tuttle, and J. M. Fulweiler, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Thornton, J. Myrick, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          THORNTON, Judge

          On rehearing in Bank, the Court rendered the following opinion:

         By the Court:

         The conclusion reached by Department Two in this cause is in accord with the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, rendered at its present term in the case of the Ivanhoe Mining Company v. The Keystone Consolidated Mining Company. (Morrison's Transcript of Decisions of the Supreme Court of U.S. 129.) The opinion of the Department will therefore stand as the opinion of the Court in Bank.


Summaries of

Wedekind v. Craig

Supreme Court of California
Nov 1, 1880
56 Cal. 642 (Cal. 1880)
Case details for

Wedekind v. Craig

Case Details

Full title:G. L. WEDEKIND v. WILLIAM CRAIG

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Nov 1, 1880

Citations

56 Cal. 642 (Cal. 1880)

Citing Cases

Lux v. Haggin

all. 507; Basey v. Gallagher, 20 Wall. 670; McDonald v. Bear River Co ., 13 Cal. 232; Ortman v. Dixon , 13…

Hermocilla v. Hubbell

         In Higgins v. Houghton , 25 Cal. 253, it was held by the supreme court of this state that mineral…