Ive been Claim Jumped!

[Asmbandits]

I think that Asm has already done his due diligence and them some. If his paper work is as he says then he is clearly the senior claimant and the new filer has weak standing. My point is that this is a self resolving situation if both parties do nothing
Ask has no tangible losses save for a few signs, I doubt he can recover he legal expenses when they were voluntary. If the new claimant were to take further action like filing assessment or working the claim that is different. The new claimant did not "take" anything, only made a claim. I think immediately running to court is unnecessary and certainly expensive...mostly for Asm.
I do not suggest that Asm surrender his senior claim. I suggest he has already proven it....if the paper work is as it seems

The top filer also did take a aluminum placard on the discovery monument, it did no grow legs, un screw itself from the monument and walk away. The sign was there to deter this situation from happening in the first place with valid information. While not a big deal in the grand scheme of things it is still something I will have to replace due to the actions of the top filer. Not even pursuing, yet another burden the top filer has created for me to correct.

I didn't run to the court, still haven't but I assure you with the stance the top filer has and continues to have it will absolutely be not only necessary but my only option for resolve. And being in my situation the financial burden will fall on the top filer when all is said and done I'm fairly cretin.

[Asmbandits]

I’ll have to do some looking when I have a chance, but there must be some type of protection afforded legally to discovery monument vandalism as if not anyone could just come along and do what this guy did with not recourse. That doesn’t sound right. Taking down the signs believing he’s right, ok I kinda see that, and they are not required. But corner markings/discovery monument I would think to be different.

[Goldwasher]

The top filer also did take a aluminum placard on the discovery monument, it did no grow legs, un screw itself from the monument and walk away. The sign was there to deter this situation from happening in the first place with valid information. While not a big deal in the grand scheme of things it is still something I will have to replace due to the actions of the top filer. Not even pursuing, yet another burden the top filer has created for me to correct.

I didn't run to the court, still haven't but I assure you with the stance the top filer has and continues to have it will absolutely be not only necessary but my only option for resolve. And being in my situation the financial burden will fall on the top filer when all is said and done I'm fairly cretin.

from his last comment. He still doesn't understand at all I think.

All because someone he isn't even supposed to ask. Gave him info they aren't supposed to give.

Or that didn't even go down that way.

People have a tendency to try and deny mistakes by putting words in other peoples mouths.. Wether or not that persons mouth was even open.

Hence the reason the court doesnt care what the people behind the counter say, do or hand you.

For sure saying all that "you" found showed it abandoned. " The people at the county agreed" While there are infact legal recordings going back years. Yea not gonna cut it.

Honestly All Gerry and the rest of us "bullying" the guy are doing is telling the dude to save his Money.


He has already wasted around $300 bucks Why waste more? The Judge is gonna very briefly look at the filings and recordings. Find Forbandits. and wll award him any costs he has incurred.

Pretty nice of Gerry to give him such a heads up. Big ol' meanie.

[Goldwasher]

I’ll have to do some looking when I have a chance, but there must be some type of protection afforded legally to discovery monument vandalism as if not anyone could just come along and do what this guy did with not recourse. That doesn’t sound right. Taking down the signs believing he’s right, ok I kinda see that, and they are not required. But corner markings/discovery monument I would think to be different.

It is vandalism. depending on the act it can be worse than that. Especially removing corners and monuments.

S.O. told me you have to have proof of who did it. I have a case open for a sign and cameras right now.

Deputy also said since they are on atv's and shooting up trees and claim signs that the BLM could potentially get involved.

Though I'm not really interested in reminding BLM that they have gound where I am

So, for now it's just stacking evidence and what footage i can get. Being there as often as I can be. But, they come through late evenings and nights.

[OreCart]

Yeah the vandalizing sings is what raised my eyebrows early on. I try to look at things from both sides and I could never understand that aspect of it.

Here in Maine at least, the language is about the same for trying to find a resolution, but it just means almost everything has to go through a court mediator first. A online chatroom is NOT what they are referring to, but maybe things are different in California.

I do hope they can mediate it out though, only because court is not cut and dry. Here, where the courts are clogged up with all kinds of cases, and back logs are 10 months out; all it takes is a judge who feels their time is being wasted to make some crazy verdicts.

[OreCart]

Here, we do not have mineral rights issues as much as Timber Theft, and my Great, Great Grandfathered was murdered for it.

Some boys cut over the line, and he was going to his attorney to recover the loss when he was shot while walking the boundary line. The guys doing the cutting claimed it was a hunting accident and got away with the murder since no one could prove otherwise. (1898)

Back in the old days, this sort of thing got mighty serious!

[OreCart]

I’ll have to do some looking when I have a chance, but there must be some type of protection afforded legally to discovery monument vandalism as if not anyone could just come along and do what this guy did with not recourse. That doesn’t sound right. Taking down the signs believing he’s right, ok I kinda see that, and they are not required. But corner markings/discovery monument I would think to be different.

Again...different, but here in Maine only Surveyors can mark and remove boundary markers. I can legally refreshen them, but I cannot remove or mark the lines.

It even says in the bible NEVER to remove boundary markers (Proverbs)...

[blackchipjim]

If I may interject my humble opinion here. You know where I prospect sometimes has claims listed and sometimes they are listed as closed. I have only twice found claim markers and once they were washed down stream from the claim. I'm an out of state prospector and would research a claim probably to ninth degree before ever taking over an area claim marked or not. I have been reminded more than a few times that it is my responsibility to make certIan I'm not mineral trespassing. I have no desire to trespass on someone else's claim and would just give it up if I made a mistake in doing so.

[Bejay]

Is land open or already claimed. That is the question. Since claim markers do not have to be maintained; simply doing the boots on the ground look see does not suffice....most often these markers are destroyed/removed by vandals. Plus in timbered areas like Oregon and Wash they can be extremely hard to see/find. So the next step that usually occurs is a person contacts the BLM and has them check and give a verbal response: yea or nay. Of course one must then know that the BLM is just reference information...(their file)…..it is helpful but not the "real meal deal". The BLM tends to think they are the claim experts so they often volunteer opinions. Then of course the County recorder has documentation that is binding...but even at that; if a claim tends to change names and corners then all one finds is not relevant to "checking out a specific claim by name". I have even seen where claims that are not located properly have been recorded...so this even makes things more difficult.

Lots of overclaiming occurs...especially if the claims tend to overlap bgut are laid out differently. Possession is the key factor to maintain your claim. My Landmatters is always a good reference and it sure would be wise to spread the word. But in most cases Newbies tend to not know a whole lot so they have a tendency to error. One might want to understand possession...it is an important factor.


Bejay

[Bejay]

Claim recordings and filings are public information.
The reason you make an informational claim filing with the BLM is so that all public land managers have current notice of your possession. It is presumed under the FLPMA that your annual filing with the BLM is sufficient notice to the land management Agency. Proof of a valid mineral claim. You had better have a certified copy of the County Recorders filing with you or you are just whistling dixie from the Courts point of view. The BLM filing doesn't prove a claim - leave it at home in your claim records.

All county recorders have standards set at the State level for what constitutes a valid public record. In particular Affidavits are required to meet the State standards before a Recorder can accept the document to put it in the public record.

Here is the text and a link to the Federal laws on mining claims. This applies to all Mining Claims on the public lands.

"43 U.S.C. §1744. Recordation of mining claims

(a) Filing requirements
The owner of an unpatented lode or placer mining claim located prior to October 21, 1976, shall, within the three-year period following October 21, 1976 and prior to December 31 of each year thereafter, file the instruments required by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection. The owner of an unpatented lode or placer mining claim located after October 21, 1976 shall, prior to December 31 of each year following the calendar year in which the said claim was located, file the instruments required by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection:

(1) File for record in the office where the location notice or certificate is recorded either a notice of intention to hold the mining claim (including but not limited to such notices as are provided by law to be filed when there has been a suspension or deferment of annual assessment work), an affidavit of assessment work performed thereon, on 1 a detailed report provided by section 28–1 of title 30, relating thereto.

(2) File in the office of the Bureau designated by the Secretary a copy of the official record of the instrument filed or recorded pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection, including a description of the location of the mining claim sufficient to locate the claimed lands on the ground.

(c) Failure to file as constituting abandonment; defective or untimely filing

The failure to file such instruments as required by subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall be deemed conclusively to constitute an abandonment of the mining claim or mill or tunnel site by the owner;"

[Bejay]

LEARNING MINING LAW 101 ……………..
"NO POSSESSORY ACTION BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS IN ANY OF THE COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES FOR RECOVERY TITLE SHALL BE AFFECTED BY THE FACT THAT THE PARAMOUNT TITLE TO THE LAND ON WHICH SUCH MINES ARE, IS IN THE U.S. ., BUT THAT EACH CASE SHALL BE ADJUDGED BY THE LAW OF POSSESSION"

Or put in todays understanding:
NO POSSESSORY ACTION BETWEEN (INDIVIDUALS): THOSE PEOPLE GIVEN TITLE TO A GIVEN TRACT OF MINERAL LAND, IN ANY OF THE COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES FOR (RECOVERY): RESTORATION OF THEIR FORMER RIGHT TO ANY MINING (TITLE): POSSESSION/OCCUPATION, OR FOR (DAMAGES): ..TO ANY SUCH (TITLE): POSSESSION/OCCUPATION, SHALL BE AFFECTED BY THE FACT THAT THE (PARAMOUNT): THAT WHICH IS SUPERIOR (TITLE): POSSESSION/OCCUPATION TO THE LAND ON WHICH SUCH MINES ARE, IS IN THE U.S. ., BUT THAT EACH (CASE): CONTESTED QUESTION BEFORE A COURT SHALL BE (ADJUDGED): DETERMINED/DECIDED BY JUDICIAL PROCEDURE BY THE LAW OF (POSSESSION): THE PHYSICAL ENJOYMENT OF A THING WHILE OTHERS ARE EXCLUDED.
This says courts must decide that there can be no other rule affording the miner all the rights of his claim other than the physical right of his use and no others.


DEFINITIONS:
INDIVIDUALS ……….TITLE GIVEN TO A GIVEN TRACT OF MINERAL LAND
CASE……………………..A CONTESTED QUESTION BEFORE A COURT
FACT………………………AN ACTION: A THING DONE,
TITLE……………………….THE MERE POSSESSION OR OCCUPATION
RECOVERY……………….RESTORATION OF A FORMER RIGHT
POSSESSION…………….THE PHYSICAL ENJOYMENT OF A THING, WHILE OTHER ARE EXCLUDED.
ADJUDGED……………….DETERMINED/DECIDED BY A JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
DAMAGES…………………THOSE THINGS HARMFUL, OR WITHDRAWN THAT ARE BELONGING TO.

[OreCart]

I got the perfect solution; Klondi can buy the Silver King Mine!

111 acres in Nelson, BC for $289,000. I am sure a man (or woman) could get a few bucks off if they paid in cash. (Small injection of humor to lighten the mood).

[M.E.G.]

Posting Sample; Jefferson Mining District 'Oregon':
Posting Sample; Jefferson Mining District Oregon

[Bejay]

TITLE 34. MINERAL RESOURCES
MINES AND MINERALS
ARTICLE 45. OFFENSES
C.R.S. 34-45-101 (2013)
34-45-101. Damages for taking ore



In trials for the recovery of the value of ore or minerals wrongfully mined and extracted, if plaintiff shows himself entitled to recover, and if he had the rightful possession of the ground from which the ore was taken at the time the action was brought or tried, the fact that defendant may have been in possession, either actual or constructive, when the case was tried shall not deprive plaintiff from recovering damages for the value of the ore or mineral mined and extracted according to the rules of law pertaining to the trials of actions of that character. But for the purpose of the action, plaintiff shall be deemed and held to be in possession of all the ground, drifts, stopes, openings, and premises from which the ore was taken, although he may not be able to reach such ground from his own openings and workings. The rule of law that plaintiff can recover nominal damages for the first entry, and then wait until he obtains actual possession of the ground from which the ore was taken, and then bring another action for the value of the ore or mineral so mined and taken, shall not be observed nor applied to defeat, in the first action, the recovery of the value of the ore or mineral so wrongfully mined and taken.

C.R.S. 34-45-101

[MT_Thunter]

Check Craigslist and any site claims are sold in your area including the gpaa