Legal Opinion

Robinson v. Armstrong

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 2, 1932No. Nos. 13,001, 13,002PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

These parties appear here in the same order as in the trial court. Plaintiffs in error represent the signers of a referendum petition. They are hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs. Defendant in error Armstrong is hereinafter referred to as the secretary, and defendant in error, Daniel J. Sparr, as Sparr.

Plaintiffs filed a petition to refer to the electorate an act passed by the Legislature. Sparr filed a protest wbicb the secretary sustained. Plaintiffs brought an action to review that order. This suit the trial court dismissed. To review that judgment plaintiffs bring error. This writ is…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Conte v. MeyerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  2. Brownlow v. WunchSupreme Court of Colorado · 1938
  3. Breniman v. Agricultural Consultants, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Newland v. HollandColorado Court of Appeals · 1981
  5. Kalish v. BriceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1957

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API