Legal Opinion

Polz v. Donnelly

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 12, 1949No. 16,234PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Jackson

*96Plaintiff, who is plaintiff in error here, sued defendant on a promissory note seeking recovery of an alleged unpaid balance of $838.21. The note was given in part payment of a used Luscombe 8A-41 plane.

Defendant answered and counterclaimed in the following language: “Defendant admits signing a note on May 15, 1941, but alleges and states that said note was given in payment for a used luscombe BA plane [in all other places in the record the plane is referred to as a Luscombe 8A] which was purchased Máy 19, 1941, from the plaintiff for the sum of $2150.00. That the plaintiff stated as a fact…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Gunning v. CooleySupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  2. Pennsylvania Railroad v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Puckhaber v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Franklin v. Skelly Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
  5. Reese v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. People v. RamirezSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007
  2. People v. UrsoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1954
  3. Brent v. Bank of AuroraSupreme Court of Colorado · 1955
  4. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950
  5. Coakley v. HayesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950

12 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