Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Bemel Associates, Inc. v. Brown

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 26, 1967No. 21629Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Sutton

I concur as to the majority holding that Robert C. Brown was guilty of.fraud and that as to him the trial court’s judgment should be reversed. I would not, however, affirm the dismissal of Inglis Mortgage Company for reasons which hereinafter appear.....

My reading of the. entire record .and examination of the exhibits fails to disclose that Brown at any time rented the adjoining space from Inglis. The undisputed evidence is. that he was put in Inglis’s office by its then President, as Brown testified,, with the idea of Brown becoming Inglis’s Denver manager and to seek mortgage loan…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Chamberlain v. PoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1953
  2. Gordon v. PettingillSupreme Court of Colorado · 1939
  3. Panhandle Pipe & Supply Co. v. SW Pressey & SonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1952
  4. Burck v. HubbardSupreme Court of Colorado · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API