Cutshaw v. City of Denver
Colorado Court of Appeals
Appeal from the District Court of Arapahoe County. On the 23d day of November, 1889, the following ordinance was adopted by the city conncil of the city of Denver: . “Be it enacted by the City Conncil of the City of Denver.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of Arapahoe County. On the 23d day of November, 1889, the following ordinance was adopted by the city conncil of the city of Denver: . “Be it enacted by the City Conncil of the City of Denver. “ARTICLE 1. “Section 1. There shall he in the city of Denver a department to he called the ‘ Department for the Inspection of Buildings,’ which shall be supplied with suitable office rooms, and the necessary supplies and printing, for the proper transaction of business, in the same manner as now provided for other executive departments of the city. “Sec. 2. The chief…
1Opinion of the CourtThomson, P. J.
It is conceded that the ordinance in question was consistent with the provisions of the charter in force at the time of its adoption; and, by the terms of see*348tion 1 of article IX, of the act of April 3, 1893, if it was not inconsistent with the provisons of that act, it remained a valid ordinance.
For the plaintiff, it is contended that the ordinance, at least in so far as the validity of the plaintiff’s appointment and the fixing of his salary are concerned, was not overthrown by the amended charter ; while in behalf of the city it is argued, that the effect of that law was to abrogate it in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- City of St. Louis v. LaughlinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- Morse v. MorrisonColorado Court of Appeals · 1901
3Cited by3 opinions
- Westerlund v. Black Bear Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913
- Reid v. City of MuskogeeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
- Boyd v. HendricksonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1932