Legal Opinion

Willson v. Colorado & Southern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 6, 1914No. 7555PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Boulder District Court. — Hon. James E. G abrigues, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gabbert

The motion of the C. & S. and D. B. & W. for judgment on the pleadings, or more properly speaking, as the record shows, for judgment by default for want of a reply, was based upon the ground that the respective replications of plaintiff, to the effect that all new mat*313ter in tlie answers of these defendants was denied, did not pnt in issue the affirmative defenses so pleaded. Such a denial is poor pleading and vulnerable to a motion to make more specific, — but as the replications were not so assailed they were sufficient to put in issue the affirmative averments of the respective answers to…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Railroad Co. v. BarronSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
  2. Heeg v. . LichtNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  3. Chicago & Erie Railroad v. MeechIllinois Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Pennsylvania Co. v. EllettIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Colorado Mortgage & Investment Co. v. ReesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Pope v. Edward M. Rude Carrier Corp.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Liber v. FlorSupreme Court of Colorado · 1966
  3. Moore v. Standard Paint & Glass Co. of PuebloSupreme Court of Colorado · 1960
  4. Denver Tramway Corp. v. GentrySupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
  5. Combs v. Standard Oil Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1927

4 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