Campbell v. Los Angeles Gold Mine Co.

28 Colo. 256
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedJanuary 15, 1901
DocketNo. 4050
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 28 Colo. 256 (Campbell v. Los Angeles Gold Mine Co.) 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
Campbell v. Los Angeles Gold Mine Co., 28 Colo. 256 (Colo. 1901).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On the merits, the sole question in this case relates* to the validity of that part of the section of the Lien Act which provides that in all suits for the forclosure of a mechanics’ lien, in case plaintiff obtains a judgment, attorneys’fees shall be taxed as costs. Sec. 18, p. 325, Session Laws 1893. The court of appeals in this case — Los Angeles Gold Mining Co. v. Campbell. 13 Colo. App., 1; 56 Pac. Rep. 246, held that such provision was unconstutional. Since that opinion was handed down, this court, in the case of Davidson v. Jennings, 27 Colo., 187; 60 Pac. Rep. 354, has reached the same conclusion. The constitutionality of the portion of the act in question is, therefore, no longer a debatable question; and as no other is involved which gives this court jurisdiction the writ of error must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, and it is so ordered.

Writ dismissed.

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

Related

Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Van Fleet
47 Colo. 401 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 Colo. 256, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-los-angeles-gold-mine-co-colo-1901.