Bank of Bromfield v. McKinley
Supreme Court of Colorado
Error to Denver District Court. — Hon. Geo. W. ArrEn, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Musser
The abstract in this case is very deficient in many particulars, and especially in that it omits a large part of the testr mony that was material on behalf of the defendants. Under the issues presented the correctness of the judgment here for review depends upon the sufficiency of the evidence to sup ■ *280port it. Because of the condition of the abstract, it would be necessary to affirm the judgment, without any further discussion, were it not for the fact that the defendants in error have, by a supplemental abstract, supplied some testimony that upon the -whole record must be regarded as very…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Davis v. JohnsonColorado Court of Appeals · 1894
- Gumaer v. SowersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1903
3Cited by11 opinions
- Denver & Rio Grande Railroad v. A. Peterson Grocery Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1915
- Plattsmouth State Bank v. ReddingNebraska Supreme Court · 1935
- Sunvara Land Co. v. Fiduciary Trust Co. of New YorkSupreme Court of Colorado · 1962
- Bonuso v. Shroyer Loan & Finance Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1944
- Lane v. LaneSupreme Court of Colorado · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.