Ruby Chief Mining & Milling Co. v. Gurley
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal f rom District Court of Arapahoe County.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Helm
The first question presented by counsel for appellant requires but little attention. It is based upon alleged irregularities in the service of process. When the motion to quash the return upon the summons was denied, a general appearance was made on behalf of appellant and an answer' was filed traversing the averments of the complaint. The defects, if any, in the service were thus waived. By appel(lant’s action the court obtained jurisdiction in the premises as fully as if there had been no irregularity in the issue, service or return of the summons. The principle of waiver under such…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Union Pac. R'y Co. v. De BuskSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
3Cited by6 opinions
- Denver Tramway Co. v. OwensSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
- Ruby Chief Mining & Milling Co. v. PrenticeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1898
- Cunningham v. BostwickColorado Court of Appeals · 1895
- Loveland's Estate v. Union National BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1898
- Burnett v. MeyerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.