Eppich v. Clifford
Supreme Court of Colorado
Error to District Court of Arapahoe County. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHelm, J.
This action was brought by plaintiff in error in the court below for the specific performance of a contract to sell real estate; A' demurrer was sustained to the complaint, and the action dismissed.
The only statement in writing concerning said contract is the following:
“Denver, December IT, 1880.
“Received of Christopher A. Eppich the sum of $25, *494part payment for lots 1, 2, 3, in block 28, Case & Ebert’s addition to Denver. Consideration, $2,000.
“Michael Clifford,
“Per A. M. Ghost & Co., Agents.”
But one error is assigned; it presents for our consideration the sufficiency of the foregoing…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Triebert v. BurgessCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1857
- Harvey v. StevensSupreme Court of Vermont · 1871
3Cited by15 opinions
- Kidd v. EarlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- Rice v. BushSupreme Court of Colorado · 1891
- Sholovitz v. NoorigianSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1919
- Micheli v. TaylorSupreme Court of Colorado · 1945
- Ross v. PurseSupreme Court of Colorado · 1891
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.