Legal Opinion

Thatcher v. Crisman

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided January 15, 1895PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to the District Court of Arapahoe County.

1Opinion of the CourtBissell, P. J.

Obed Crisman was a grantee under a deed with full covenants, executed in November, 1888, by Sullivan and Thatcher. The property conveyed was lots 101 and 102 in an addition to Cottage Hill in Arapahoe county. It was unimproved, and neither grantors nor grantee had other than the constructive possession which the title may draw after it. Conceiving that there had been a breach of the covenants, Crisman brought the present suit, and stated five different causes of action. In three of them the breach was stated to consist of a ten years user by the public. This may be dismissed from…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Denver City Irrigation & Water Co. v. MiddaughSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
  2. Colorado Cent. R. v. AllenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
  3. Dumoss v. FrancisIllinois Supreme Court · 1854
  4. Galbraith v. LittiechIllinois Supreme Court · 1874

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Warren v. Chouteau CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Goerke v. Town of ManitouColorado Court of Appeals · 1914
  3. White v. Town of ArvadaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1915
  4. Goerke v. Town of ManitouColorado Court of Appeals · 1914
  5. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. AtkinsonColorado Court of Appeals · 1913

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