Legal Opinion

Smith v. Miller

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 3, 1963No. 20531PublishedCited by 111 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Moore

Plaintiffs in error Smith, Monk, and Ross are county commissioners of El Paso County. The Colorado State Association of County Commissioners was granted leave to appear as an intervenor. The interests of the commissioners and the intervenor are the same, and plaintiffs in error accordingly will be referred to as the Board. Defendants in error were plaintiffs in the trial court. The three parties first named in the above caption are judges of the district court of the Fourth Judicial District which includes the county of El Paso. The other defendants in error are employees of the district…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. NOBLE CTY. COUNCIL ETC. v. State Ex Rel. FiferIndiana Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Powers v. IsleyArizona Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Bass v. County of SalineNebraska Supreme Court · 1960
  4. City & County of Denver v. LynchSupreme Court of Colorado · 1932
  5. State ex rel. Schneider v. CunninghamMontana Supreme Court · 1909

3Cited by111 opinions

  1. Eichelberger v. EichelbergerTexas Supreme Court · 1979
  2. COM. Ex Rel. CARROLL v. TATESupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. People v. McKennaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1978
  4. Commonwealth ex rel. Carroll v. TateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  5. Vondy v. Commissioners Court of Uvalde CountyTexas Supreme Court · 1981

106 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