Legal Opinion

Bill Dreiling Motor Company v. Shultz

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided February 3, 1969No. 22004PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Moore. *

Defendants in error were plaintiffs in the trial court and will be referred to herein as plaintiffs or by name. Plaintiff in error will be referred to as defendant or as Dreiling.

The complaint of plaintiffs contained two claims for relief: (1) Rescission of a contract allegedly procured by false representation; and (2) damages for breach of warranties contained in the contract sought to be rescinded in the first claim. On motion of defendant, plaintiffs were required to elect as between the two claims, and they elected to proceed upon their claim for rescission.

Th…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Clemann v. BandimereSupreme Court of Colorado · 1953

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Keller v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1991
  2. Christensen v. HooverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  3. Ficor, Inc. v. McHughSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  4. Tinker v. De Maria Porsche Audi, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  5. Dinosaur Park Investments, L.L.C. v. TelloColorado Court of Appeals · 2008

17 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