Lothrop v. Roberts
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from Superior Oou/rt of Denver. Appellee as plaintiff instituted this action against Charles F. Cook, Charles H. Scott and Wilbur C. Lothrop as defendants. The suit was originally brought upon two promissory notes, but prosecuted upon one only, to which the names of the defendants appear as joint makers. Reither Cook nor Scott made defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Superior Oou/rt of Denver. Appellee as plaintiff instituted this action against Charles F. Cook, Charles H. Scott and Wilbur C. Lothrop as defendants. The suit was originally brought upon two promissory notes, but prosecuted upon one only, to which the names of the defendants appear as joint makers. Reither Cook nor Scott made defense. Lothrop appeared and filed a sworn answer, in which he denied the execution of the note, and charged that the signature of his name thereto was not genuine, but a forgery. A replication was thereafter filed, but it is not necessary to state this…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hayt
The facts in this case upon which a right of recovery is based are peculiar. It is not claimed that Lothrop himself signed the note in question, or that he received any benefit therefrom, but it is claimed that Scott signed Lothrop’s name, and that he was authorized so to do. Both Scott and Lothrop appeared and testified, Scott swearing that he had authority to sign, and Lothrop emphatically denying such authority. In support of Scott’s evidence it was shown that he and Lothrop were at the date of the making of the note, and for some time subsequent and prior thereto had been, warm personal…
2Cited by14 opinions
- People v. ScheidtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1973
- Burlington Northern Railroad v. HoodSupreme Court of Colorado · 1990
- Commonwealth v. JoyceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
- Gallegos v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1965
- Kirby v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1902
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.