Legal Opinion
Foothills Holding Corp. v. Tulsa Rig, Reel & Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided July 6, 1964No. 20499PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Day.
We will refer to plaintiffs in error as Foothills and Gantenbein and to the defendant in error as Tulsa.
The latter filed three separate complaints in the Jefferson County District Court against Foothills and Gantenbein. Each action alleged the execution and delivery of a promissory note by Foothills and Gantenbein to Tulsa, each secured by a deed of trust executed by Foothills. The respective complaints alleged default in the obligations and that Foothills and Gantenbein jointly and severally owed Tulsa the unpaid amount plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees, all…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Folda Real Estate Co. v. JacobsenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1924
- Hall v. Farmers BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
- Greene v. WilsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1932
- Murray v. ReadySupreme Court of Colorado · 1929
- American Bonding Co. v. RudolphSupreme Court of Colorado · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Mortgage Investments Corp. v. Battle Mountain Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2003
- Royal Palm Corporate Center Ass'n v. PNC Bank, NADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
- Foster Lumber Co., Inc. v. Weston Constructors, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1974
- Moening v. Alaska Mutual BankAlaska Supreme Court · 1988
- Szego v. Kingsley AnyanwutakuDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.