Andre v. Jones

Supreme Court of Colorado

Andre v. Jones

1 Colo. 489

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedFebruary 15, 1872

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 1 Colo. 489 (Andre v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Andre v. Jones, 1 Colo. 489 (Colo. 1872).

Pincite

Opinion

Beleord, J.,

was of opinion that leave to amend ought to be allowed.

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss must .be allowed; the appeal was granted upon certain conditions, which have not been complied with. Haskins has evidently abandoned his appeal. The defendants might have prayed joint and several appeals, but they both united in the only appeal which was prayed, and a joint appeal of two cannot be prosecuted by one only. Watson v. Thrall, 3 Gilm. 69; Johnson v. Barber, 4 id. 1.

Motion allowed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beleord, J.,

was of opinion that leave to amend ought to be allowed.

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss must .be allowed; the appeal was granted upon certain conditions, which have not been complied with. Haskins has evidently abandoned his appeal. The defendants might have prayed joint and several appeals, but they both united in the only appeal which was prayed, and a joint appeal of two cannot be prosecuted by one only. Watson v. Thrall, 3 Gilm. 69; Johnson v. Barber, 4 id. 1.

Motion allowed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Colo. 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andre-v-jones-colo-1872.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack