Bechmann v. Taylor
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Denison
The plaintiffs in error were plaintiffs below. Their action was for specific performance of an agreement for renewal, contained in a lease to them from one Hackley who had afterwards conveyed the remainder to defendant Taylor. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained, the plaintiffs elected to stand and judgment was entered against them. We think the judgment was wrong.
The complaint shows that Hackley gave Bechmann (for simplicity we ignore his co-lessees) a lease for five years, from March 1, 1921, to March 1, 1926. The lease was on a printed form and contained the following in Hackley’s…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hayes v. O'BrienIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Cunningham v. PatteeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Tracy v. . Albany Exchange Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1852
- Sylvis v. SylvisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
- Cochrane v. Justice Mining Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1891
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Edwards v. TobinOregon Supreme Court · 1929
- Shull v. SextonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1964
- George Y. Worthington & Son Management Corp. v. LevyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1964
- Slayter v. PasleyOregon Supreme Court · 1953
- Rainwater v. HobiekaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1946
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.