United States v. Rizzinelli
United States District Court for the District of Idaho
182 F. 675 (1910)
Various mining-claim locators (defendants) were fined by the federal government (government) (plaintiff) for maintaining saloons on their mining claims within the Coeur d’Alene National Forest without a federal permit. The defendants appealed to the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. The defendants argued that the General Mining Law of 1872, 30 U.S.C. § 26, gave them the right to the exclusive enjoyment of their land for all purposes, including non-mining purposes. The defendants also claimed that constructing valuable buildings unrelated to mining was customary, and that hardship would result from the confiscation of their property rights. The government argued that the term “exclusive enjoyment” applied only to mining purposes.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Dietrich, 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.