Legal Opinion

Burkhardt v. Bank of America Et Al.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 16, 1953No. 16850PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holland

This is an action on a guaranty for payment of rent. Counsel -for defendant in error say, “The only issue in this case is the validity of this agreement, and whether plaintiff in error is liable thereunder.” Counsel for plaintiff in error, to whom we will herein refer as defendant, contend that the guaranty involved lacks consideration; that it is a special guaranty and not general; that being special, any rights thereunder did not descend to the heirs of the guarantee. There are other questions raised by defendant concerning this guaranty that are not controlling within themselves; however,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Yama v. SigmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1945

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Niederer v. FerreiraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  2. Voest-Alpine Trading USA Corp. v. Vantage Steel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
  3. Blackhawk Hotel Associates v. KaufmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Industrial Investment Corp. v. RoccaIdaho Supreme Court · 1979
  5. New Holland, Inc. v. TrunkDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

21 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