Stewart Mining Co. v. Ontario Mining Co.,
237 U.S. 350 (1915)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Stewart Mining Co. v. Ontario Mining Co., 237 U.S. 350 (1915)

Stewart Mining Company v. Ontario Mining Company

No. 205

Argued March 17, 18, 1915

Decided April 26, 1915

237 U.S. 350


The locator of a mining claim has the right under § 2322, Rev.Stat., to the surface included within the lines of his claim, and if a vein has its top or apex within the claim, he may follow such vein downward although it may depart from a perpendicular in its downward course, outside of the vertical side lines of the location -- that is, into adjoining grounds within the limited lines expressed in the statute.

The strike and the dip of a vein must not be confounded, nor the rights dependent upon them confused.

Where the state court does more than merely decide whether the apex of a vein is or is not within the location, but also construes the statute under which plaintiff in error asserts its rights, there is a question of law as well as of fact, and this Court has jurisdiction under § 237, Judicial Code.

Extralateral rights to a vein under § 2322, Rev.Stat., depend upon the position of its top or apex.

Accepting the proper definition of apex of a vein as all that portion of a terminal edge of a vein from which the vein has extension downward in the direction of the dip, it does not appear that the apex of the vein invoked in this action was within plaintiff's claim, and therefore no extralateral rights exist under § 2322, Rev.Stat.

Quaere whether, under § 2322 Rev.Stat., a vein can be pursued in the direction of its strike at an angle of less than 45 degrees to the course thereof.

23 Idaho 724 affirmed.

Page 237 U. S. 351

The facts, which involve the construction of Rev.Stat., § 2322, and the right of the locator of a mining claim to follow the vein downward, are stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.