Legal Opinion

Maher v. Shull

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided April 15, 1898No. 1363Published

Error to the District Court of Lake County.

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, J.

This was an action to enforce a mechanic’s lien for work done upon a mining claim. The facts material to a determination of the issue are undisputed, and are in fact admitted by the pleadings. Defendant Galloway was the owner of an undivided three fourths of the Oxford mining claim, and had a lease upon and option to purchase the remaining one-fourth interest. While so possessed of the property, he entered into a written contract with his codefendant Shull to sell to him an undivided one-half interest in said claim, and in his lease and option upon the one-fourth interest. By the terms of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kellogg v. HowesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Davies Henderson Lumber Co. v. GottschalkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Adkison v. HardwickSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
  4. Rice v. CarmichaelColorado Court of Appeals · 1893

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

Powered by the Exa API