Laserfiche WebLink
Plaintiffs completed the acts of location and filed their location certificates on August 24, <br /> 2005 which was within the 90 day window. Therefore, Plaintiffs August 24, 2005 <br /> location certificates are valid and are senior to Mr. Congdon's August 5, 2005 location <br /> certificates. <br /> LOCATION AND GOOD FAITH <br /> Defendants contend that the Plaintiffs relocation is invalid because it was not <br /> done in good faith. <br /> In order to enter on public land, the locator must make a good faith entry. <br /> Columbia Standard Corp. v. Ranchers Exploration & Development, Inc., 468 F.2d 547, <br /> 549 (!0`h Cir. 1972). "Good faith" is defined as acting with "honesty of purpose and <br /> absence of intent to defraud." Geomet Exploration Ltd. v. Lucky Mc Uranium Corp., 601 <br /> P.2d 1339, 1343 (Ariz. 1979). Mere Knowledge of a prior claim, in and of itself, does <br /> not constitute bad faith. Id. <br /> Defendants argue that the Skinners did not act in good faith when relocating the <br /> White Banks Claims because they knew about the forfeiture in May of 2005 and failed <br /> to tell Mr. Congdon; all of the information contained in their location certificates came <br /> from Mr. Congdon's information; and the Skinners have made no attempt to develop the <br /> claims. <br /> The Skinners were under no duty to tell Mr. Congdon that his claims had been <br /> forfeited. It was Mr. Congdon's obligation to make sure that he filed the appropriate <br /> paperwork and fees to maintain his claims. Relying on Mr. Congdon's information in the <br /> location certificates and failing to further develop the claims does also not give rise to <br /> bad faith. In addition, the Skinners did not have an evil motive in wanting to claim the <br /> is <br />