White Pine news weekly mining review. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1910-1920, 1915-01-03
Injunction Is
Mere ArtiGce
IN SEEKING TO DISSOLVE RE-
STRAINING ORDER, DEFEND
Ant GOODY SAYS ACTION OF
COURT Is CONTRARY TO LAW.

motion to dissolve the injunc-
tion issued in the case of James II.
Marriott against Forest d. and Opal
p. Goody on the ground that the COM
plant was without merit or equity
and the order issued out of the dis
trict court was improvidently and
improperly made and upon INSULT
cient grounds was filed in the clerk 8
office last Wednesday The hearing
of the injunction has been set for
next Tuesday before G. J. McFadden,
the newly elected district Judge.
The defendants in their answer al
lege that the present proceedings are
merely a scheme and an artifice on
the part of plaintiff to exclude them
J from possession of the claims. whose
title is in jeopardy. and especially
the Cumberland group, which is more
valuable than all the other mineral
ground.
In preventing him from develop
ing the gold bearing tract. Goody in
Inmates that the action of the court
will permit Marriott and Franklin X.
Goheen to extract and strip the ores
disclosed on the Cumberland hold
ings, thus depreeiating and gradually
rendering valueless a mechanics lien
on those properties for $3021.2O.
The defendant Goody denies that
the assessment work was not per-
formed for the year 1914, and alleges
that 1t was incomplete on the Nevada.
Alice r. and Nevada Extension. He
states In the answer that he had al
ready commenced work on the Blue
bird and was arranging to start OPP
erations on the Grand Deposit and
likewise on the Bluebell. until he
had already learned that Marriott
had placed a man on that property.
Goody denies that these claims con-
stitute a portion of the Cumberland
group
II is admitted In the answer that
II. j. Sisty. who is anxious to acquire
title to the ground now immersed in
judicial contest, demanded possess
sion OF the group on December Is.
but Goody claims that he never re-
fused Marriott possession at any time
except about a year ago when c. P.
Goody was in control Of the Cumber-
land estate through lease from the
Boston Nevada Mining company and
ownership OF two-fifteenths inter
est. Goody says that he refused to
surrender the properties to Marriott
at that time.
Goody declares that he never OBJ
jected to Marriott entering upon any
OF the claims mentioned in the COM
plant. except those constituting the
Cumberland group. which are in the
possession of c. p. Goody and him
self as her agent. He also says that
Sisty was given every facility by the
defendants to sample the claims and
states that they have never refused
any prospective purchaser or inves-
tor permission to thoroughly examine
the ground
II Is contended by Goody that these
properties are held as security for
the payment of an Indebtedness from
Franklin X. Goheen of Toledo. Ohio.
grantor of plaintiff Marriott. Goody
alleges that he claims title through
certain mine conyeyances from Bos-
ton Nevada company. the former
owner
The answer of the defendants as
sers that there is an understanding
and agreement with Goheen aud
plaintiff that Goody shall. II possible.
procure a purchaser al price and
upon terms satisfactory to Goheen
and thai upon such sale that Goody
shall deduct from the proceedr tie
amount 81 The indebiedness owing
from Goheen. Goody also mentions
in the answer that he commenced
action against the BostonA yada
COMPANY and Goheen. and that b.
bsE bren IN peaoeablc aud undiaisrb.
=. ppteteslon since that time 10
Hi'tEen that the plaintin holds title
subjsfi 70 bls lien