Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Farrell Vs. Lockhart

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 18, 1908

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

27 entries 2 linked 25 unlinked
Show
  1. Lavagnino Vs. Uhlig US Supreme Court · May 29, 1905
  2. Belk Vs. Meagher US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1881
  3. U.S. 142 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Farrell v. Lockhart
    Search
  4. U.S. 142 (1908) Farrell v. Lockhart
    Search
  5. when the second location is made, there has been an actual abandonment of the claim by the first locator. Lavignino v. Uhlig
    Search
  6. In deciding this question, the court deemed that it was called upon to consider and apply the ruling in Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  7. the count considered that the reasoning in question ought to be restricted, because not to do so would cause Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  8. to mining claims, and unsettle rights of property of great value. The court did not at all doubt that Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  9. view of the issues in that case, but, for the reasons which we have just stated, it held that the ruling in Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  10. did not embrace the discovery point of the first, but was a mere overlap. Thus applying the ruling in Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  11. the highest courts in some of the mining states or in territories of the United States where mining prevails -- Nash v. McNamara
    Search
  12. P. 405, and cases cited -- which, in considering the reasoning of Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  13. judgment was affirmed, we do not pause to particularly reexamine the reasoning expressed in the opinion in Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  14. said would arise from a change of such practice, and taking into view the prior decisions referred to, especially Belk v. Meagher
    Search
  15. U. S. 279 , as also the more recent case of Brown v. Gurney
    Search
  16. there had been an actual abandonment of the original senior location. We say this because, taking into view Belk v. Meagher
    Search
  17. and Brown v. Gurney
    Search
  18. the second location was made, there had been an actual abandonment of the claim by the first locator. In Black v. Elkhorn
    Search
  19. without any writing to that effect, and by any act evincing an intention to give up and renounce the same. Snell v. Levitt
    Search
  20. White v. Manhattan
    Search
  21. U.S. Supreme Court Farrell v. Lockhart
    Search
  22. Lavignino v. Uhlig
    Search
  23. Nash v. McNamara
    Search
  24. of Lavagnino v. Uhlig
    Search
  25. of Brown v. Gurney
    Search
  26. In Black v. Elkhorn
    Search
  27. Snell v. Levitt
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial