TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Alice A. Boyle and Carrie H. Boyle v. Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary of the Department of the Interior of the United States of America

Alice A. BOYLE and Carrie H. Boyle, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Rogers C. B. MORTON, Secretary of the Department of the Interior of the United States of America, Defendant-Appellant

Boyle v. Morton, 519 F.2d 551 (9th Cir. 1975)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
August 29, 1975
Docket
No. 72-2690
Judges
Browning, Goodwin, King, Per Curiam
Citations
519 F.2d 551

Opinion — Per Curiam

OPINION PER CURIAM:

The Secretary’s decision, reported at 76 I.D. 318, must be sustained.

The Secretary’s finding that there had been no discovery of a valuable deposit of decomposed granite within the limits of appellees’ claims prior to July 23, 1955, is supported by substantial evidence. Most of appellees’ proof consisted of general unsupported claims of sales in unspecified amounts. Specifically identified sales totaled about $100 over an eight-year period. This was not enough to establish, as a matter of law, that the marketability test of United States v. Coleman, 390 U.S. 599 , 88 S.Ct. 1327 , 20 L.Ed.2d 170 (1968), was satisfied.

The record also supports the Secretary’s finding that the red, gold, and pink decomposed granite found on appellees’ claims was a “common variety” of stone and, by the terms of 30 U.S.C. § 611 , therefore could not be the basis for a valid mining claim. The record shows that a large quantity of colored decorative decomposed granite similar to appellees’ was available from other deposits in the same general marketing area. The Secretary therefore properly compared the price of appellees’ decomposed granite only with the price of this similar decorative granite, and not with the price of all decomposed granite, in determining that appellees’ granite did not have a “distinct and special value.”

Brubaker v. Morton, 500 F.2d 200 (9th Cir. 1974).

Reversed and remanded for entry of summary judgment for appellant.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1984: 12017: 119842026peak 1984 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Tanner Companies v. Arizona State Land Department688 P.2d 1075 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984)
  2. J. Stacey v. Sally Jewell692 F. App'x 363 (9th Cir. 2017)

Most recent

  1. J. Stacey v. Sally Jewell692 F. App'x 363 (9th Cir. 2017)
  2. Tanner Companies v. Arizona State Land Department688 P.2d 1075 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Coleman, 390 U.S. 599 (1968) 149
R. W. Brubaker, Who is Also Known as Ronald W. Brubaker v. Morton, 500 F.2d 200 (9th Cir. 1974) 22

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list