Legal Opinion

Denver Park & Amusement Co. v. Kirchhof

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided January 12, 1931No. 12,234PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

For convenience we hereinafter designate these parties as do counsel in their briefs, i. e., plaintiff in error Denver Park and Amusement Company as Denver Park, and defendants in error Francis J. Kirchhof as Kirchhof, Denver Greyhound Racing- Association as Greyhound, the W. B. Barr Lumber Company as Barr, Ramapo Ajax Corporation as Ramapo, Charles E. Buckman as Buck-man, the Hendrie <fe Bolthoff Manufacturing- «fe Supply Company as Hendrie, the Colorado Fuel <fe Iron Company as C. F. «fe I., the Duvall-Davison Lumber Company as Duvall, and the American National Bank as the bank.

This is a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Mechanics' Ins. Co. of Philadelphia v. C. A. Hoover Distilling Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
  2. Michael v. BaconSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
  3. Baker v. CouchSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
  4. Baker v. SockwellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1926
  5. Mound v. BarkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1899

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. McKeown Bros. v. Ogden Kennel ClubAppellate Court of Illinois · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API