Legal Opinion

Ochsner v. Langendorf

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 2, 1946No. 15,804PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bakke

Carl Langendorf, defendant in error, plaintiff below, brought an action for possession of certain real estate, of which he was the owner, against the Ochsners who claimed possession for the year 1946 by virtue of ah oral assignment of a lease from Henry Moore, who admittedly had an oral lease on the premises for the year 1945. The trial court ruled against the Ochsners, quieted title to the property in, and awarded its possession to, Langendorf. The Ochsners seek reversal on a writ of error and have asked that the matter be decided on their application for supersedeas, and we have elected to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Eppstein v. KuhnIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Zippar v. ReppySupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
  3. Hallett v. BarnettSupreme Court of Colorado · 1911
  4. Markley v. Hilkey Bros.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1945
  5. Wells v. BlystadSupreme Court of Colorado · 1932

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. First Interstate Bank v. Tanktech, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1993
  2. D. A. C. Uranium Co. v. BentonDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1956
  3. Randolph v. Koury Corp.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Saccomano v. PalermoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1966
  5. Tanktech, Inc. v. First Interstate BankColorado Court of Appeals · 1992

3 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