Legal Opinion

Chadbourne v. Davis

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 15, 1886PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal .from District Court of Chaffee County. This action grows out of an oral contract entered into by and between the plaintiff Chadbourne, and the defendant Davis, early in the month of June, 1881, by the terms of which Davis agreed to prospect for the discovery of mines during the summer season, and to locate his discoveries in the joint names of himself and Chadbourne; each to be the owner of an undivided half interest therein.

Read the full summary

Appeal .from District Court of Chaffee County. This action grows out of an oral contract entered into by and between the plaintiff Chadbourne, and the defendant Davis, early in the month of June, 1881, by the terms of which Davis agreed to prospect for the discovery of mines during the summer season, and to locate his discoveries in the joint names of himself and Chadbourne; each to be the owner of an undivided half interest therein. In consideration of the services of Davis, in the above capacity, Chadbourne agreed to furnish all necessary provisions, cash and transportation necessary for…

1Opinion of the CourtBeck, C. J.

The evidence throughout the case is very conflicting, contradictory and unsatisfactory. A court can only correctly estimate such testimony when given in its presence. We are of opinion that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the rescission of the contract as to further prospecting for mines after August 1, 1881. Several witnesses testify to it, and the testimony of the plaintiff is not in plain contradiction. He admits saying more claims had been discovered up to that date than could be worked; also that he told Davis he could not afford to work on every mineral streak he might discover,…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Coppock v. RobertsOregon Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Hooper v. BellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1948
  3. Schmidt v. HortonNevada Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Tritch v. PerrySupreme Court of Colorado · 1910
  5. Abbott v. SmithColorado Court of Appeals · 1893

2 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