Legal Opinion

Palmer v. Perkins

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 11, 1949No. 16,054PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hays

On April 8, 1946, plaintiffs in error, to whom we herein refer as plaintiffs, entered into a contract with George H. and Bartle H. Day, for the purchase of the business known as New Method Laundry, including all tangible and intangible property connected therewith. This institution conducted a general laundry, cleaning and dyeing business in the city of Grand Junction. Pursuant to the contract the sale was consummated June 1, 1946, at which time a substantial sum was paid and arrangements made for the payment of the balance of the purchase price.

Upon learning of the above transaction…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bedford v. Colorado Fuel & Iron Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1938
  2. Tawes, Comptroller v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
  3. Fifteenth Street Investment Co. v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1938
  4. Shotkin v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1948

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission v. Washington National ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  2. Md.-Nat'l Cap. P. & P. v. Wash. Nat'l ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  3. City & County Denver v. United Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2000
  4. V-1 Oil Company v. County of BannockIdaho Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Liebhardt v. Department of RevenueSupreme Court of Colorado · 1951

8 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