Rhinehart Third Court of Appeals DECISION

[Oakview2]

http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/C074662.PDF

Good news! The California Third District Court of Appeals validates the federal preemption defense, but sends the case back for trial as to, among other things, whether the refusal to issue suction dredge mining permits renders it “commercially impracticable” to exercise mining rights.

Unfortunately, the Court also declared that the opinion should not be published, meaning, in theory, that other litigants in California are forbidden to cite it. I have always regarded this rule as an obvious violation of the First Amendment right to petition the government, and at some point, some one should invest in striking down the “no citation” rules

Please note that under Rule 8.1120 of the California Rules of Court, “any person” may request that an unpublished opinion be published. Mining and other interests throughout the West may wish to do so in compliance with that rule (see the Rule here).

Many thanks to those who have supported this litigation, and whose continuing support will be required to make a good record in the Superior Court of Plumas County going forward.

----------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------
James L. Buchal
Murphy & Buchal LLP
3425 SE Yamhill Street, Suite 100
Portland, OR 97214

Phone: 503-227-1011
Fax: 503-573-1939

[Au Seeker]

Great News!!!

I also find it rather hard to believe that they can make a judgement and then turn around and make a decision to not publish it!!!

[mn90403]

Thank you, thank you.

They want the 'fights' to continue.

How will this affect the other case?

Mitchel

[Oakview2]

http://www.goldgold.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/memo-Rinehart-developments-9-23-14.pdf