Legal Opinion

Springhetti v. Hahnewald

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 3, 1913No. 6968PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error to Lake District Court. — Hon. Charles Cavender, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gabbert

Defendants in error, plaintiffs below, brought an action against plaintiffs in error, as defendants to recover sums of money which, it was charged, had been obtained from them by- fraud and willful deceit on the part of the defendants, and also to cancel all indebtedness or claims of indebtedness against the plaintiffs in favor of the defendants growing out of the same transaction. At the time this suit was instituted, there was another action pending by Springhetti against Albert Hahnewald, on a three thousand dollar note which had been given by Hahnewald to Springhetti in connection with *385the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Diamond Rubber Co. v. HarrymanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1907
  2. Sams Automatic Car Coupler Co. v. LeagueSupreme Court of Colorado · 1898
  3. City of Canon City v. ManningSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Aaberg v. HA Harman CompanySupreme Court of Colorado · 1960
  2. Wheeler v. WilkinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1936
  3. Moe v. LowrySupreme Court of Colorado · 1921
  4. Burroughs Corporation, a Michigan Corporation v. Rocky Mountain Prestress, Inc., a Colorado CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1970
  5. United States v. LimbsDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 1973

3 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