Legal Opinion

Larimer & Weld Reservoir Co. v. Fort Collins Milling & Elevator Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 15, 1915No. 8179PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Larimer District Court. Hon. Robert G. Strong, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

Garrigues, J.,

after stating the facts as above.

*2451. A motion by a defendant for judgment on the pleadings, where a complaint, answer, and replication are filed, admits the truth of all material allegations well pleaded. Where an issue tendered by the answer is admitted by the replication, the court in order to sustain defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, must find (even if the replication could be established), the law requires that the motion be sustained. The question presented then, is: Admitting its pleadings to be true, can plaintiff maintain the action, and is it entitled to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Peck v. PeckSupreme Court of Colorado · 1905
  2. New Cache la Poudre Irrigating Co. v. Arthur Irrigation Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1906

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. United States v. BellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
  2. Ireland v. WynkoopColorado Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. North Poudre Irrigation Co. v. HinderliderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1944
  4. Dormer v. WalkerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1937
  5. Koch v. WhittenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1959

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

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

Powered by the Exa API