Legal Opinion

Hofmann v. Lamb

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided July 2, 1945No. 15,221PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Knous

The action herein involved is in replevin. The proceeding was instituted below by defendant in error, hereinafter designated as plaintiff, against C. Lee Hoffman for the possession or value of two Marine-engines; one of six-cylinders and the other of four, with certain accessories. By reason of plaintiff’s election to not file an undertaking in replevin, no writ was issued and the sheriff made no attempt to take possession of either of said motors in advance of judgment. Before issue was joined, upon motion of C. Lee Hoffman, Caspar Hofmann, plaintiff in error, was made a party defendant. Due…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hoyt v. ClemansSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
  2. A. H. Andrews & Co. v. Colorado Savings BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
  3. Turnbull v. ColeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1921
  4. Clatworthy v. FergusonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1922
  5. Clark v. BrightSupreme Court of Colorado · 1902

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. American National Bank of Denver v. EtterColorado Court of Appeals · 1970
  2. Spokane & Eastern Lawyer v. TompkinsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  3. Morgan v. FreelColorado Court of Appeals · 1970

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API