Camelin v. Smith

53 Colo. 574
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedSeptember 15, 1912
DocketNo. 7712
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 53 Colo. 574 (Camelin v. Smith) 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
Camelin v. Smith, 53 Colo. 574 (Colo. 1912).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Garrigues

delivered the opinion of the court:

1. An examination of the purported bill of exceptions, shows that it was signed by the succeeding- judge, and not by the trial judge. The motion to strike it from the files will therefore be sustained. — Feckheimer v. Trounstien, 12 Colo. 282; Empire L. & C. Co. v. Engley, 14 Colo. 289; Water Supply Co. v. Tenney, 21 Colo. 284.

2. The remaining question, is whether the succeeding judge should, as a matter of right, have sustained the motion for a new trial. By the weight of modern authority, the [575]*575succeeding judge, presiding over the same court, may decide a motion for a new trial in the absence of a statute to the contrary. — People ex rel. Hambel v. McConnell, 155 Ill. 192.

Affirmed.

Chief Justice Campbell and Mr. Justice Musser concur.

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

Related

Brncic v. District Court
431 P.2d 475 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1967)
Olmstead v. District Court of the Second Judicial District
403 P.2d 442 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1965)
Olmstead v. DISTRICT COURT OF SECOND JUDICIAL DIST.
403 P.2d 442 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1965)
Boyles v. People
6 P.2d 7 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1931)
Lovelock Lands, Inc. v. Lovelock Land & Development Co.
283 P. 403 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 Colo. 574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/camelin-v-smith-colo-1912.