Henritze v. Borden Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Henritze v. Borden Co.

432 P.2d 2, 163 Colo. 589, 1967 Colo. LEXIS 932

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedOctober 2, 1967

DocketNo. 21757

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 432 P.2d 2 (Henritze v. Borden 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

Henritze v. Borden Co., 432 P.2d 2, 163 Colo. 589, 1967 Colo. LEXIS 932 (Colo. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Hodges.

[590]*590Henritze’s motion to set aside a judgment entered pursuant to the terms of a cognovit note was denied. Henritze contends the trial court erred because his motion was sufficient to require the court to vacate the judgment.

When a motion to vacate a judgment is made, in accordance with R.C.P. Colo. 60(b), it must allege a defense which is prima facie meritorious; and also, it must be stated with' such particularity that the court can see that it is a substantial and meritorious defense, and not merely a technical or a frivolous one. Burr v. Allard, 133 Colo. 270, 293 P.2d 969.

We have reviewed the record and particularly Henritze’s motion to vacate. We agree with the trial court’s denial of this motion, which failed to show any meritorious defense.

The judgment is affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Moore, Mr. Justice Day and Mr. Justice Pringle concur.

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