Jabelonsky v. Fike

Supreme Court of Colorado

Jabelonsky v. Fike

244 P.2d 1081, 125 Colo. 487, 1952 Colo. LEXIS 337

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedMay 19, 1952

DocketNo. 16,510

StatusPublished

This text of 244 P.2d 1081 (Jabelonsky v. Fike) 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

Jabelonsky v. Fike, 244 P.2d 1081, 125 Colo. 487, 1952 Colo. LEXIS 337 (Colo. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This proceeding involves a municipal zoning ordinance. Petitioners, who are defendants in error here, applied to the municipal authorities of the City and County of Denver for a permit to use a building, belonging to them, as a rooming house, which application was denied; thereupon they instituted an action in the district court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to com[488]*488pel the city building inspector to issue the desired permit. The trial court ordered that the building inspector be “restrained * * * from in any manner interfering with petitioners’ use of the property * * * as a rooming house.”

Mr. Justice Knauss did not participate in this review. The other justices being equally divided in opinion as to what disposition should be made of the cause, the judgment is affirmed by operation of law. Rule 118 (f) R. C.P. Colo.

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

Per Curiam.

This proceeding involves a municipal zoning ordinance. Petitioners, who are defendants in error here, applied to the municipal authorities of the City and County of Denver for a permit to use a building, belonging to them, as a rooming house, which application was denied; thereupon they instituted an action in the district court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to com[488]*488pel the city building inspector to issue the desired permit. The trial court ordered that the building inspector be “restrained * * * from in any manner interfering with petitioners’ use of the property * * * as a rooming house.”

Mr. Justice Knauss did not participate in this review. The other justices being equally divided in opinion as to what disposition should be made of the cause, the judgment is affirmed by operation of law. Rule 118 (f) R. C.P. Colo.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 P.2d 1081, 125 Colo. 487, 1952 Colo. LEXIS 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jabelonsky-v-fike-colo-1952.