From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Midland Co. v. Allen

Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc
Jun 26, 1933
23 P.2d 1119 (Colo. 1933)

Opinion

No. 13,331.

Decided June 26, 1933.

Judgment for plaintiff in lower court.

Affirmed. On Application for Supersedeas.

1. APPELLATE PROCEDURE — Divided Court. One justice not participating and the others being evenly divided as to what disposition should be made of the case, the judgment is affirmed by operation of law.

Error to the County Court of the City and County of Denver, Hon. George A. Luxford, Judge.

Mr. ISAAC MELLMAN, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. HARRY A. FEDER, Mr. RONALD V. YEGGE, for defendant in error.


THE attorneys herein ask that this case be determined upon the hearing of the application for a supersedeas. It has been heard and considered, Mr. Justice Moore not participating. Mr. Justice Campbell, Mr. Justice Burke and Mr. Justice Bouck are in favor of affirmance, whereas Mr. Chief Justice Adams, Mr. Justice Butler and Mr. Justice Hilliard are in favor of reversal. As the case therefore stands affirmed by operation of law because of an equally divided court (Code '21, section 439), no good purpose would be served by a statement of the issues or of the reasons for the conclusions of the several members of the court.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Midland Co. v. Allen

Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc
Jun 26, 1933
23 P.2d 1119 (Colo. 1933)
Case details for

Midland Co. v. Allen

Case Details

Full title:MIDLAND OIL REFINING COMPANY v. ALLEN

Court:Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc

Date published: Jun 26, 1933

Citations

23 P.2d 1119 (Colo. 1933)
23 P.2d 1119