Jim Butler Tonopah Mining Co. v. West End Consolidated Mining Co.

Background

The dispute involves the owner of two lode mining claims (the Eureka and the Curtis) suing the owner of an adjoining claim (the West End). The plaintiff sought to stop the West End owner from following a vein that runs under the surface into the plaintiff’s claims. All three claims are patented and their ownership is not disputed. State trial and appellate courts had allowed the West End owner to exercise an asserted right to follow the vein, and the plaintiff asked the higher court to reverse that ruling on three main points about claim lines, the direction the right can be used, and whether the vein’s top (apex) lies inside the West End claim.

Reasoning

The Court examined the federal mining statute that creates the so-called extralateral right and identified three statutory limits: the vein’s top or apex must be inside the claim’s vertical boundaries; the right applies along the vein’s downward dip (not along its horizontal strike); and the right is confined by vertical planes through the claim’s end lines. The Court held that the shortened diagonal corners of the West End claim are side lines, not end lines, so the end lines are straight and parallel. Reading the statute and prior decisions, the Court concluded the extralateral right covers all veins whose apex is within the claim and can be pursued beyond either or both side lines. The Court found the special facts showed a fissure vein with two dipping limbs and an apex within the West End claim and therefore affirmed the lower court’s judgment.

Real world impact

The decision confirms that a patented claim owner whose vein apex lies inside the claim may pursue that vein downward beyond side lines, even if the vein splits and dips in opposite directions. Neighbors with adjoining surface claims cannot use irregular corner cuts to defeat an extralateral right when the statute’s conditions are met. The judgment affirmed below is final for this case.