Legal Opinion

Marshall v. Russell

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 15, 1916No. 8589PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Weld District Court. Hon. Neil F. Graham, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hill

Action by the defendant in error upon, a promissory note for $1500 and interest, bearing date June 1, 1911, exe-. cuted by one Hurlbert, secured by mortgage deed upon real estate, recorded June 6, 1911. The complaint prays for foreclosure, etc., and that the defendant Marshall be barred from claiming any right to the land except the right to redeem. The decree was for the plaintiff. Marshall only brings the case here for review.

The record discloses that at' the time this note and mortgage were given there was a prior deed of trust upon the real estate in controversy, given by Mr. Hurlbert’s…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Holden Land & Live Stock Co. v. Inter-State Trading Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1912
  2. Batty v. SnookMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
  3. Hawkins v. ElstonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1914
  4. Jackson v. LynchIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Malone v. RoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Taylor v. Briggs, Adm'rSupreme Court of Colorado · 1936
  2. Larson v. HindsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API