Legal Opinion

Norton v. Young

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided April 15, 1895PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of Arapahoe County.

1Opinion of the CourtBissell, J.

This is an extraordinary judgment, for which no reason can be found in the record. In the late spring aud summer of 1892, the appellant Norton was in possession of a section of land in Arapahoe county. During his occupancy the appellee owned a lot of sheep, which were either running in the vicinity, on unoccupied land, or were being moved between two different points. The land was inclosed with a fence made of three barbed wires of sufficient size and strength to turn sheep. The flock was in charge of a herder. The sheep were turned onto the land occupied by Norton, ate up the pasturage, and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Colorado Cent. R. v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
  2. Schoolfield v. BruntonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
  3. Fugate v. SmithColorado Court of Appeals · 1894
  4. Otero Canal Co. v. HungerfordSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Monroe v. CannonMontana Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Bolten v. GatesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1940
  3. Bell v. GonzalesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1905
  4. Jones v. BlytheUtah Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Aspen Springs Metropolitan District v. KenoColorado Court of Appeals · 2015

1 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