Legal Opinion

Bonfils v. McDonald

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 25, 1928No. 11,891PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Adams

McDonald and Walter, defendants in error, were plaintiffs in the trial court. They brought suit to quiet title to certain coal lands in Routt county, and for damages. Defendants admitted that they had no claim on the property, but opposed the claim for damages. Over defendants’ objection, the case was tried to a jury, which resulted in a verdict in the sum of $2,854, for rents or royalties, and in the further sum of $6,397, claimed on account of damages to the premises. This verdict, followed by judgment, was against the plaintiffs in error, Bonfils, individually, and Tammen et al., as…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ShermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. McKee v. HoweSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
  3. In re H. Wierbitzky & Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Ver Straten v. WorthSupreme Court of Colorado · 1926
  5. Wilson v. LuntColorado Court of Appeals · 1898

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Newport Steel Corp. v. ThompsonDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1990
  2. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. MarsColorado Court of Appeals · 1991
  3. Young v. Golden State BankColorado Court of Appeals · 1977
  4. Galleria Towers, Inc. v. Crump Warren & Sommer, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Ralph Wolff & Sons v. New Zealand Insurance Co. of AucklandCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933

8 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