Legal Opinion

Brug v. Herbst

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided October 5, 1925No. 11,355PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

Plaintiff in error Fred Brug and defendant in error Henry Herbst are hereinafter referred to as “Brug” and “Herbst” respectively, defendant in error the state bank commissioner as “the bank” and defendant in error the Great Western Sugar Company as “the Sugar Company.”

This was an action in interpleader brought by the Sugar Company. It admitted owing $477.29 to some one for beets grown by Anna Lebsock and delivered to it. Brug claimed $314.50, plus interest and attorney’s fees, as against the bank and Herbst. The bank claimed $225.00 and attorney’s fees, and Herbst, admitting the priority of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Clatworthy v. FergusonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1922
  2. Bogdon v. FortSupreme Court of Colorado · 1924
  3. Liddle v. HernandezSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Tekai Corp. v. Transamerica Title Ins. Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1977
  2. Glass & Bryant Mercantile Co. v. Farmers State BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
  3. Allan v. Diamond T Motor Car Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1961
  4. The Exchange National Bank of Colorado Springs v. Raymond Hough, as TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1958
  5. Middleton Lumber & Fuel Co. v. KosankeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934

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