Legal Opinion

McDevitt v. Corfman

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 22, 1941No. 15,034PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hilliard

An action by defendants in error for relief, as in mandamus, under rule 106, Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. They prayed for reinstatement to positions under civil service, from which, as claimed, plaintiffs in error had illegally removed them, and for judgment for sallaries for lapsed periods. Reinstatement and issuance of payment-documents were adjudged.

It appears that immediately prior to July 25, 1940, defendants in error had been provisional employees of the State Industrial School for Boys at Golden, Corfman for two years, Hopkins for twelve years, and Thomas for one and one-half…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State Civil Service Commission v. LehlSupreme Court of Colorado · 1941

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Corfman v. McDevittSupreme Court of Colorado · 1943
  2. Schmidt v. HurstSupreme Court of Colorado · 1942

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API