Legal Opinion

Vade v. Sickler

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 1, 1948No. 15,826PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stone

In the year 1889 the owners of certain real estate in Adams county made and recorded a plat subdividing it into blocks, under the name of Irondale, and therein granted to the public users all streets as shown and designated thereon. Apparently this plat of Irondale was subsequently vacated, but when or how does not appear. Under date of the second day of March, 1942, the county conveyed to plaintiff in error, Vade, a parcel of ground described by legal subdivision and as “formerly known as block 92, Irondale” whereunder he claims title. Defendants in error, Sickler, claim title of record by…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Rock Springs v. SturmWyoming Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Trueblood v. PierceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1947
  3. Bettack v. ConachenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Edie v. ColemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1940
  5. Mielke v. DodgeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Beneficial Life Ins. Co. v. WakamatsuIdaho Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Anderson v. Cold Spring Tungsten, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1969
  3. Riggs v. McMurtrySupreme Court of Colorado · 1965
  4. Smith v. HaydenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1989
  5. Lively v. WickSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950

13 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