Legal Opinion

Todd v. De La Mott

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 15, 1886PublishedCited by 5 opinions

jError to District Court of Park County. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtBeck, C. J.

The present action was originally insti-, tuted in the county court of Park county, by De La Mott, the defendant in error. His complaint alleged that the East Leadville Mining Company was indebted to him for labor performed upon various mines, and for mining materials and merchandise, amounting in the aggregate to the sum of $1,998.27. The company demurred to the complaint, and, upon the overruling of the demurrer, answered, denying each and all of the claims stated in the complaint, and denying that said copartnership was, in any manner, indebted ’ to the plaintiff. The case was-tried to the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hall v. Pay Rock Consolidated Mining Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1881
  2. Smith v. District Court of Arapahoe CountySupreme Court of Colorado · 1878

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mackey v. BriggsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1891
  2. Fischer v. HannaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895
  3. Devlin v. District Court of Weber CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Board of County Commissioners v. Stone & GoodaleColorado Court of Appeals · 1898
  5. Board of County Commissioners v. Stone & GoodaleColorado Court of Appeals · 1898

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

Powered by the Exa API