Legal Opinion
Butler v. Marsh
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided January 15, 1919No. 9492PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Error to El Paso District Court, Hon. J. W. Sheaf or, Judge.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Denison.
The plaintiif in error moves for a supersedeas. Supersedeás denied, and judgment affirmed.
The suit was for $290, the balance of an account between the plaintiffs (defendants in error), Marsh and Underhill, and the defendant (plaintiff in error), Butler. The account ended December 16th, 1916.
*46The defense was that in January, 1917, the defendant had a settlement and adjustment with plaintiffs, through their traveling salesman, one LeBarre, and paid the plaintiffs three hundred and five dollars in full settlement, and that the salesman knocked off the amount sued…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- President, Directors & Co. of Mechanics' Bank v. New-York & New Haven RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Tootle v. CookColorado Court of Appeals · 1893
- National Surety Co. v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1913
3Cited by3 opinions
- Moore v. SwitzerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
- Berryhill v. EllettCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933
- London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1928