Andre v. Jones

1 Colo. 489
Supreme Court of Colorado·Decided February 15, 1872·Published·Cited by 4 cases

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

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

1 Colo. 489 (Andre v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tate v. Holly
21 Colo. App. 451 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1912)
Tanquary v. Howard
35 Colo. 125 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1905)
Diamond Tunnel Gold & Silver Min. Co. v. Faulkner
14 Colo. 438 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1890)