Legal Opinion

Reuss v. W. T. Rawleigh Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 24, 1937No. 14,068PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Burke

We heretofore affirmed this'judgment in department on the sole ground of defective abstract and assignments and on the authority of Zall Jewelry Co. v. Stoddard, 68 Colo. 395, 397, 190 Pac. 506. On petition of plaintiff in error a rehearing was granted and the cause transferred to the court en banc. On further examination and careful consideration of the abstract and assignments, but more particularly of the original bill of exceptions, it clearly appears that no summons was in fact served. The point is that the alleged summons was unsigned, and this is admitted. It therefore had no validity…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Bullock v. WallaceWashington Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Lombard v. Overland Ditch & Reservoir Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1907
  3. Miller v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1896
  4. Zall Jewelry Co. v. StoddardSupreme Court of Colorado · 1920
  5. Dailey v. Aspen Democrat Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1909

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. McGrady v. Munsey Trust Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Brown v. AmenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API