Legal Opinion
Buell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided June 5, 1962No. Civ. A. No. 7151PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DOYLE, District Judge.
The action herein seeks to quiet title to a certain strip of real estate (a portion of a vacated street) which is described in the complaint as follows:
That portion of Coloden Moor Subdivision, more particularly described as the vacated North 20 feet of First avenue, lying South of and adjoining Plot A %, Block 69, Harmans Subdivision, and lying South of and adjoining the West % of the vacated alley adjacent to said Plot.
The defendant also claims ownership. Plaintiff’s claim in general is based upon the fact that on August 19, 1948, he dedicated this vacated portion of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Livingston v. MayorCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1831
- Bissell v. . the New York Central R.R. CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Prall v. BurckharttIllinois Supreme Court · 1921
- Neil v. Independent Realty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1927
- City of Denver v. ClementsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1877
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Temple Hoyne Buell v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1963
- Martini v. SmithSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
- Buell v. Redding Miller, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1967
- Martini v. SmithColorado Court of Appeals · 2001
- Winter Park Pines Development Co. v. KohlossDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1971