Andrus v. Charlestone Stone Products Co.
United States Supreme Court
436 U.S. 604 (1978)
The Charlestone Stone Products Company (Charlestone) (defendant) purchased 23 mining claims near Las Vegas, Nevada. Charlestone drilled a well on one of the claims (Claim 22) and discovered water. Secretary of the Interior Cecil Andrus (plaintiff) filed a complaint with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), challenging the validity of Charlestone’s mining claims. The BLM held that only one of the claims was valid. Both parties appealed, and the Interior Board of Land Appeals affirmed. Charlestone sought review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The court of appeals held that Claim 22 was valid because water was a “valuable mineral” under the General Mining Law of 1872. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Marshall, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 711,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 711,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.