Legal Opinion

Mulford v. Rowland

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided January 15, 1909No. 5964PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error to Boulder District Court—Hon. James E. Gtarrigues, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Campbell

This is an action to quiet title in plaintiff to an undivided two-thirds interest in the Critic lode mining claim, situate in Boulder county. The complaint is in the usual form, alleging-generally that plaintiff is the owner in fee and in possession of the premises in controversy, and that defendant claims and asserts an interest therein hostile and adverse to plaintiff, which antagonistic interest plaintiff demands defendant shall be required to set up and have judicially determined. In the amended answer the first defense is a general denial. Plaintiff in error says the second defense was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Robert E. Lee S. M. Co. v. EnglebachSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
  2. Clements v. MacHeboeufSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  3. Machebeuf v. ClementsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1873
  4. Donovan v. WelchNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Haymaker v. Windsor Reservoir & Canal Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1927
  2. Bigelow v. NottinghamColorado Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Rocky Mountain Fuel Co. v. Clayton Coal Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1943
  4. White Cap Mining Co. v. Resurrection Mining Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1946
  5. Bennett v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925

3 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