Legal Opinion

Heinrichsdorff v. Raat

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided November 18, 1982No. 81CA1250PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

KIRSHBAUM, Judge.

Plaintiff, Gernot Heinrichsdorff, appeals the trial court’s summary judgments concluding that intervenor, The First National Bank of Colorado Springs (the Bank), and not Heinrichsdorff, is entitled to a sum of $5,000 on deposit with the court. We reverse.

The following undisputed facts are revealed by the record. On September 4, 1980, defendant Raat, doing business as Garden Construction and Landscape Company, executed a renewal note to the Bank in exchange for a loan of $20,000. The note was secured in part by a security agreement granting the Bank a security interest in “all…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Pearlman v. Reliance InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Henningsen v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  3. American Surety Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. South-Way Construction Co. v. Adams City ServiceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1969
  5. Continental Casualty Co. v. Rio Grande Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1941

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. First Commercial Corp. v. First National Bancorporation, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API