Legal Opinion

Aultman & Taylor Machinery Co. v. Forest

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided January 15, 1913No. 3873PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to La Plata District Court. How. Charles A. Pike, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtKing, J.

Plaintiff in error, as plaintiff helow, brought its action against the defendant on five promissory notes for-the principal sum of $650, set forth in haec verba. To this complaint defendant filed his answer consisting of five separate defenses. The first was a denial of immaterial averments, and did not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense.. The fourth alleged a rescission of the sale of an engine, in payment of which the promissory notes were given, but this allegation was not supported by the proof, and this defense will not be further noticed. The second, third and fifth defenses…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Waite v. DennisonIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
  2. Denny v. Van DusenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
  3. Reynolds v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
  4. McConnell v. People ex rel. PurvinesIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
  5. O. S. Kelly Co. v. McCartySupreme Court of Kansas · 1907

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Warner v. Yellow Manufacturing Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API