Reynolds v. Iron Silver Mining Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 federal appellate · 4 district · 26 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ Where the same person, association, or corporation .is in possession of a placer claim, and also a vein or lode included within the boundaries thereof, application shall be made for a patent for the placer claim, with the statement that it includes such vein or lode, and in such case a patent shall issue for the placer claim, subject to the provisions of this chapter, including such vein or lode, upon the payment of five dollar’s per acre for such vein or lode claim, and twenty-five feet of surface on each side thereof. The remainder of the placer claim, or any placer claim not embracing any vein or lode claim, shall be paid for at the rate of two dollars and fifty cents, per acre, together with all costs of proceedings; and where a vein or lode, such as is described in section twenty-three hundred and twenty, is known to exist within the boundaries of a placer claim, an application for a patent for such placer claim which does not include an application for the vein or lode claim shall be construed as a conclusive declaration that the claimant of the pla-cer claim has no right of possession of the vein or lode claim ; but where the existence of a vein or lode in a placer claim is not known, a patent, for the placer claim shall convey all valuable mineral and other deposits within the boundaries thereof.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Noyes v. Mantle

2. “it is familiar, law that ejectment turps on the plaintiff’s title. If that be good, he is entitled to.recover; if it fails, then it is immaterial what claim or title defendant may have, the verdict must be in his favor. “ If there is any exception to the rule that in an action to recover possession of land the plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title and that the defendant in possession can lawfully say, until you show some title, you have no right to disturb me, it has not been pointed out to us.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mitchell v. Smale

3. ““If the vein is not conveyed to plaintiff by the placer patent under which they claim, then it makes no difference whether defendants have any title or not; the plaintiff cannot recover on the weakness of defendants’ title.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Montana Co. v. Clark