Case Name: JAMES et al. v. WILD GOOSE MINING & TRADING CO.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1906-02-05
Citations: 2 Alaska Fed. 475
Docket Number: No. 1,228
Parties: JAMES et al. v. WILD GOOSE MINING & TRADING CO.
Judges: Before GILBERT, ROSS, and MORROW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Alaska Federal Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 475–476

Head Matter:
143 F. 868
JAMES et al. v. WILD GOOSE MINING & TRADING CO.
No. 1,228.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Feb. 5, 1906.
Dudley Du Bose, G. J. Lomen, and Charles E. Naylor, for appellants.
Chas. Page, Edward J. McCutchen, and Samuel Knight, for appellee.
Before GILBERT, ROSS, and MORROW, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ROSS, Circuit Judge.
We do not think it well to decide the important water-right question argued by counsel for the appellants on this appeal from an order denying them a preliminary injunction, the application for which was heard upon affidavits — especially as it appears that the only use of the waters in question by the appellants with which it can be claimed that the appellee interfered was by virtue of an appropriation of waters of Ophir creek, Alaska; which appropriation, it seems, was subsequent in point of time to the appropria tion of the waters of the same creek under which the appellee claims.
The order of the court below refusing a preliminary injunction is affirmed.