Legal Opinion
McKenzie v. Murphy
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided April 15, 1903No. 4448PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Appeal from the District Court of El Paso County.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gabbert
February 7, 1894, appellant entered into an agreement with Cornelius and E. It. Murphy, whereby he agreed to sell the Murphys an interest in a mining claim. The material provision in the contract is as follows:
“Upon condition, however, that the' said parties of the second part shall pay to party of the first part ($1,000) One Thousand Dollars, on or before January 1, 1896, and also to pay for, or do, an equal share according to their interest of all work or improvements put on said claim before that time, and the failure to do so within forty days after work or money has been expended by the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Waterman v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Long v. . WarrenNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Settle v. WintersIdaho Supreme Court · 1886
- Byers v. Denver Circle R.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1889
- Durant v. ComegysIdaho Supreme Court · 1891
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Martindell v. Fiduciary Counsel, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1943
- Larsh v. BoyleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906