Legal Opinion

Whitney v. Teichfuss

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided October 15, 1888PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to District Court of Chaffee County. This action was one in support of an adverse claim by H. L. Whitney et al., plaintiffs here, who were plaintiffs below, claimants of the Jenny Hess lode mining claim, against W. H. Teichfuss et al., defendants, claimants of the Dutchman lode mining claim.

Read the full summary

Error to District Court of Chaffee County. This action was one in support of an adverse claim by H. L. Whitney et al., plaintiffs here, who were plaintiffs below, claimants of the Jenny Hess lode mining claim, against W. H. Teichfuss et al., defendants, claimants of the Dutchman lode mining claim. After there had been two trials of the case, and a third trial ordered, the defendants filed an amended answer, in which certain additional allegations were made showing that plaintiffs had failed to do certain assessment work upon the Jenny Hess lode claim, and had forfeited their rights thereto,…

1Opinion of the Court

Stallcup, C.

There is no bill of exceptions of anything occurring prior to said motion to retax costs. The *556evidence, the motions presented at the trial, and the exceptions to the court’s decisions and orders thereon, are not made part of the record. The errors assigned and argued here are that the court erred in denying the motion to strike out the amended answer, and in denying the motion to retax costs. The motion to strike out the said amended answer, and exceptions to the ruling of the court thereon, not being preserved in a bill of exceptions, form no part of the record proper and cannot…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Cord v. SouthwellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Heacock v. HosmerIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Howard v. RichardsNevada Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Anderson v. SloanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1867
  5. Marshall Silver Mining Co. v. KirtleySupreme Court of Colorado · 1884

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ghost v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
  2. Momand v. Paramount Publix Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1937
  3. First National Bank v. FollettSupreme Court of Colorado · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API