Legal Opinion

Gardner v. Rule

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 16, 1930No. 12,415PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Campbell

Plaintiff Gardner, payee in a cognovit note of defendant Rule, the maker, brought this action against the latter and recovered judgment upon it. There was no service of summons on the defendant, and he did not appear in the case in person or by an attorney of his own selection. Acting upon the authority conferred by the cognovit instrument, an attorney at law, selected by the plaintiff not the defendant’s attorney, appeared in the action and confessed judgment on the note in favor of the plaintiff. Seasonably, and within a short time after the defendant first learned of the existence of this…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Investors Finance Co. v. LuxfordSupreme Court of Colorado · 1928
  2. Peterson v. VanderlipSupreme Court of Colorado · 1929

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Denver Industrial Corp. v. KesselringSupreme Court of Colorado · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API