Development Work - Judgment Search Results

Oliver Iron Mining Co. Vs. Lord

Court: US Supreme Court

..... that it does not apply to owners or lessees who do development work but remove no ore do not bring it in conflict with ..... who mine or produce ore are included while those who do extensive development work but remove no ore are omitted this is not fairly subject ..... mining besides if ore is uncovered or made accessible by such development work the tax will be imposed when the ore is mined among .....

William Rowe Rae Vs. Lewis Pugh, Evans Pugh and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1924Cal940,83Ind.Cas.970

..... 1914 pugh and bowden constituted themselves a syndicate to prospect develop and work the mines in the area for which rights had been ..... to the plaintiff s evidence there had been little working bowden and pugh had developed the property a little and there was a ..... china clay was extracted though the progress of the prospecting and developing scheme was by no means satisfactory the position thus was .....

Pennsylvania Vs. West Virginia

Court: US Supreme Court

..... hitherto undeveloped gas areas may be worked or more wells may be drilled in areas already developed or new areas may be opened ..... several public service corporations of the several states the cost of developing particular fields and of marketing the supply therefrom what the ..... to that then being worked and to that already exhausted and to what extent and how rapidly the development of new areas and .....

South Utah Mines and Smelters Vs. Beaver County

Court: US Supreme Court

..... of value in the early part of a mine s development will become excessive as the stage of exhaustion approaches the ..... contained could be profitably recovered in august 1914 plaintiff stopped work on its mining claims and has never since resumed the ..... the leasing company took possession of the tailings constructed reduction works using in connection therewith some of the plaintiff s improvements .....

Yuma County Water Users' Assn. Vs. Schlecht

Court: US Supreme Court

..... of alternatives to be considered and difficult problems to be solved but the matter has developed from the engineering side to a point where it is possible to consider the ..... the record shows was not unreasonable the government then itself undertook the completion of the work physical conditions not originally foreseen were encountered presenting difficulties and requiring increased expenditures of .....

Georgia Ry. and Power Co. Vs. Railroad Comm'n

Court: US Supreme Court

..... the losses under consideration in the case at bar were obviously not a part of development cost they were due to insufficiency of previous rates third two further objections to the ..... included in it which are alleged to have been undervalued the companies contend that the working capital required was 420 000 whereas only 266 677 was allowed they also contend that .....

Bluefield Water Works Vs. Public Service Comm'n

Court: US Supreme Court

..... commission of missouri supra footnote 1 difference in depreciation allowed 49 000 preliminary organization and development cost 14 500 bluefield valley waterworks plant 25 000 water rights 50 000 excess overhead ..... of actual cost less depreciation plus 10 percent for going value and 10 000 for working capital this resulted in a valuation considerably and materially less than would have been reached .....

Eibel Process Co. Vs. Minnesota and Ontario Paper Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

..... as he took one was a mere obvious application of fully developed devices in the prior art eibel in his patent gives this ..... and entitled to liberal treatment indeed when one notes the crude working of machines of famous pioneer inventions and discoveries and compares them ..... box in increasing the head would have interfered with the free working of the wire since that time an improvement has been adopted .....

Baltimore and Ohio R. Co. Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

..... branch railroad into the curtis bay region for the purpose of developing new territory the railroad company in the summer of 1917 ..... winter months after numerous conferences as to means of expediting the work the officers of the department in december insisted that the ..... company for completing it on a cost plus basis by working continuously day and night the new contractor completed the railroad .....

Gorham Mfg. Co. Vs. Wendell

Court: US Supreme Court

case of state officers reference is made to long sault development co v call 242 u s 272 to show from