Legal Opinion

Gioso v. Di Bell

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided January 13, 1931No. 12,414PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

Payment was made on a note to one who assumed to act as agent and who appropriated the money. The question here is, Who must lose?

Plaintiffs in error are hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs, defendants in.error as defendants, or as Di Bell, Mrs. Di Bell, and ITotz, and one James A. Fleming, who did some business under the fictitious name of Frances Borwig, as Fleming.'

May 15, 1922, Di Bell gave his note for $2,000 to “Frances Borwig.” It drew six per cent semiannual interest, was. secured by a trust deed to Hotz on the home of Di Bell, and was payable in one year at the office of Fleming.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sigel-Campion Live Stock Commission Co. v. ArdohainSupreme Court of Colorado · 1922
  2. Wales v. MowerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
  3. Galligan v. SchapiroSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
  4. Hahn v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Colorado National Bank v. RehbeinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1931
  2. Citywide Banks v. ArmijoColorado Court of Appeals · 2011
  3. Burck v. HubbardSupreme Court of Colorado · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API