Doherty & Co. v. Steele
Supreme Court of Colorado
Action for the return of irrigation district bonds. Judgment for plaintiffs. Error to the District Court of the City and County of Denver, Hon. Charles C. Butler, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Denison
Steele was plaintiff below and obtained a decree requiring Doherty & Company to return to the East Denver Irrigation District certain bonds of that district which had been delivered to them in partial performance of a contract. The facts are fully set forth in the case of The Antero & Lost Park Reservoir Co., et al. v. Lowe, 69 Colo. 409, 194 Pac. 945.
Briefly, the district, in 1910, by its board of directors, entered into a contract with a corporation which we will call the Promotion Company, for the purchase of a completed system of irrigation, — reservoirs, canals, gates, etc., —specified…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Kayser v. MaughamSupreme Court of Colorado · 1885
- Gates v. PaulWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Cree v. LewisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1910
- United Coal Co. v. Canon City Coal Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1897
- Ellis v. BardinWashington Supreme Court · 1904
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Meredith v. RamsdellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1963
- Doherty & Co. v. YoungblutSupreme Court of Colorado · 1922
- Calvert v. JosephNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1927
- District Landowners Trust v. DohertySupreme Court of Colorado · 1934
- Cuddigan v. San Juan Federation of Mine, Mill & Smelter WorkersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1942
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.