Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bowman v. Reyburn

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 29, 1946No. 15,300Published

1DissentJustice Bakke

I respectfully dissent. A reading of the Court’s opinion discloses that it loses sight of the two primary reasons why Exhibit C was executed, viz., to repay Reyburn his $50,000, and to save something from the Norman Apartments for Bowman’s family out of the reorganization. With these in mind, I propose to show that the prayer for specific performance should have been granted.

I take the liberty of restating the factual background as I gather it from the record: The two principals in the litigation are William N. Bowman and Roscoe Reyburn. Bowman is the husband of Alice, and father of Dorothy,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Dittbrenner v. MyersonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1946
  2. Smurr v. KamenIllinois Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Marsh v. Brown-Crummer Investment Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1933
  4. State Highway Commission v. AmesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1936
  5. Adams v. GuiraudSupreme Court of Colorado · 1917

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