Legal Opinion

City of Central v. Axton

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided January 17, 1966No. 21046PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

•Mr. Justice McWilliams

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The designation of parties in this court is deemed necessary to an orderly consideration of this writ of error and such designation is therefore set forth as follows:

1. The City of Central, a municipal corporation which will hereinafter be referred to as Central City, is designated as the plaintiff in error;

2. William L. Axton, individually and doing business as the Glory Hole Tavern is designated as a defendant in error;

3. Faye Tyson, formerly known as Faye Clapham, individually and doing business as the Lost Gold Mine is designated…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Keefe v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906
  2. Post v. City of Grand JunctionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1948
  3. City of Englewood v. WrightSupreme Court of Colorado · 1961
  4. Jackson v. City of Glenwood SpringsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950
  5. Walsh v. CroftMontana Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Walgreen Co. v. CharnesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
  2. Gold Star Sausage Co. v. KempfSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  3. Pierce v. City and County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1977
  4. Vick v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1968
  5. Central City Opera House Ass'n v. City of CentralColorado Court of Appeals · 1982

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

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

Powered by the Exa API