UNITED STATES
v.
CALIFORNIA MIDWAY OIL COMPANY ET AL.

U.S. | 1923-12-10
No. 62
263 U.S. 682 Supreme Court of the United States (1923) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Affirmed upon the authority of Washington Securities Co. v. United States, 234 U. S. 76, 78; Baker v. Schofield, 243 U. S. 114, 118; Southern Ry. Co. v. Puckett, 244 U. S. 571, 574; Piedmont & Georges Creek Coal Co. v. Seaboard Fisheries Co., 254 U. S. 1, 13.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Wilcox v. First Interstate Bank OF Or., N.A., 815 F.2d 522 (9th Cir. 1987)
    ….Rev. at 112 (footnotes omitted). Federal common law, in the days before Erie, required clear and convincing evidence of fraud. See United States v. California Midway Oil Co., 259 F. 343, 352-53 (S.D.Cal.1919), affd, 279 F. 516 (9th Cir.1922), affd, 263 U.S. 682, 44 S.Ct. 136, 68 L.Ed. 504 (1923). Requiring that RICO claims based on mail fraud be proved by clear and convincing evidence would further the policy of discouraging claims that are difficult and time-consuming to prove. Borrowing the standard of…
  • Melton E. Baker v. United States, 613 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1980)
    …. . See 30 U.S.C. §§ 35, 36 (limit on the size of placer claims); 30 U.S.C. § 23 (limit on the size of claims on veins or lodes). . In United States v. California Midway Oil Co., 259 F. 343 (S.D.Cal.1919), aff'd. 279 F. 516 (9th Cir. 1922), aff’d. 263 U.S. 682, 44 S.Ct. 136, 68 L.Ed. 504 (1923), the court made the following observation: “. There is so far no law of Congress or regulation made in pursuance thereof limiting the number of placer mining claims an individual or association of individuals may…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw