v1022-367

IS THE DOCTRINE OF "GROUP DEVELOPMlfcNT''

APPLICABLE TO THE PICKETT ACT?

IN THE

aimtpJi ^tuUB dtrntit (Hmtt nf Appeals

FOR THE

NINTH CIRCUIT

CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL OIL COMPANY,

a Corporation, and J. M. McLEOD,

Appellants,

vs. No. 2787.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee.

CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL OIL COMPANY,

a Corporation, and J. M. McLEOD,

" Appellants,

vs. No. 2788.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee.

BRIEF IN BEHALF OF APPELLANTS,

1. 1. CLOTFELTER,

CHARLES S. WHEELER,

JOHN F. BOWIE,

OSCAR LAWLOR,

1. 1. WEIL,

Attorneys for Appellants.

Filed this day of November, 1916.

FRANK D. MONCKTON, Clerk.

By ^^pEhI4 .:^- .rl

=^^B^

The James H. Barry Co.,

1. 1. Moncktoi,

Cierk.

---

archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs1022

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs1022

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs1022#page/n366/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

work, claims, discovery, oil, pickett, mining, development, government, bill, section, statutes, patent, land, withdrawal, quarters

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

pickett bill, assessment work, revised statutes, annual assessment, section 2324, pickett bill., mutual oil, consolidated mutual, section 2325, pedis possessio, existing mining, oil bearing, ohio oil, land office, diligent work

Document Status: UGLY