Silver King Co. v. Conkling Co., 256 U.S. 18 (1921)

Silver King Coalition Mines Company

v. Conkling Mining Company
No. 158

Petition for rehearing
Decided April 11, 1921
256 U.S. 18

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

1. Petition for rehearing treated as a motion for the determination of questions argued but left open by the former decision, 255 U.S. 151. P. 25.

2. Within the intent of the mining law, Rev.Stats., § 2322, with respect to the right to pursue a vein extralaterally on its dip, those are the "end lines" of a lode location that cut across the strike of the vein if it crosses the location. P. 25.

3. A presumption that there was a discovery vein crossing the end lines of a location as laid out should not be indulged, for the purpose of denying extralateral rights to a vein crossing the side lines, where there is substantial evidence that this was the only vein apexing within the location, and no substantial evidence to the contrary. P. 26.

4. Where the vein of a patented claim crossed the location transversely, held that the right to pursue it on dip beneath an adjacent junior patented claim was not affected by the fact that either the discovery shafts of the senior claim or the vein would be left outside of it if its side lines (located as end lines) were limited as they should be, because a discovery shaft was not essential to the validity of the location at the time when it was made, and because discovery of the vein must be presumed in favor of the senior patent. P. 27.

5. Evidence held to prove that one of a series of similar deposits, found at many different horizons, connected with a fissure vein and similar in composition to the ore in the fissure, was a part of that vein, rather than a distinct bedded deposit. P. 27.

Decree (230 Fed.Rep. 553) reversed.

Petition by the respondent for a rehearing as to questions presented but left undecided in s.c., 255 U.S. 151. The questions are disposed of on the argument as originally made.