Floyd v. Cochran

24 Colo. 489
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedJanuary 15, 1898
DocketNo. 3652
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 24 Colo. 489 (Floyd v. Cochran) 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
Floyd v. Cochran, 24 Colo. 489 (Colo. 1898).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Goddard

delivered the opinion of the court.

This case involves the validity of one of the deeds through which Floyd, the plaintiff in error, claimed title to the Empress lode mining claim, which was issued in pursuance of a sale of the property under the Margaret Sargent judgment referred to in Sellers v. Floyd, ante, p. 484, and presents the question of the right of Cochran to redeem the property from that sale. In that case we determined the rights of the parties to the property, and held that the title thereto had become vested in Floyd through and by virtue of certain other execution sales. The question involved in this case, therefore, is no longer of any practical importance, and any judgment that might be rendered upon this writ of error would in no way affect the right or title of the parties to the property in controversy. In such circumstances we must decline to consider the merits of the question. As was said in Mills v. Green, 159 U. S. 651:

“ The duty of this court, as of every other judicial tribunal, is to decide actual controversies by a judgment which can be carried into effect, and not to give opinions upon moot questions or abstract propositions, or to declare principles or rules of law which cannot affect the matter in issue in the case before it.”

The writ of error will therefore be dismissed.

Writ dismissed.

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

Related

Metropolitan Development & Housing Agency v. Hill
518 S.W.2d 754 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1974)
Royster v. English
334 P.2d 733 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1959)
Reserve Life Ins. Co., Dallas, Tex. v. Frankfather
225 P.2d 1035 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1950)
San Luis Valley Irrigation District v. Sutley
197 P. 1014 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1921)
True v. True
194 P. 1062 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1921)
Stutsman v. Earles
122 N.E. 355 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1919)
Alldredge v. Alldredge
151 P. 314 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1915)
Nichols v. Katres
57 Colo. 471 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1914)
Burns v. National Mining, Tunnel & Land Co.
23 Colo. App. 545 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1913)
Woodmen Investment Ass'n v. Grand Junction
51 Colo. 353 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1911)
Bull v. Doss Bros. Electric Construction Co.
51 Colo. 459 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1911)
Hawthorne v. Hendrie & Bolthoff Manufacturing & Supply Co.
50 Colo. 342 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1911)
Burns v. National Mining, Tunnel & Land Co.
47 Colo. 557 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1910)
Knowles v. Harrington
45 Colo. 346 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 Colo. 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/floyd-v-cochran-colo-1898.