Mott v. Downer
1 Root 425
Opinion
Tbe alteration cannot be permitted for tbe reasons suggested; for it is the proper business of auditors to examine and adjust tbe accounts, which tbe court and jury never undertake to do, in an action of this nature.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mott v. Downer, 1 Root 425 (Colo. 1792).
1 Root 425 (Mott v. Downer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Zuch v. Connecticut Bank & Trust Co.
500 A.2d 565 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)
Kane v. Kane
180 A. 308 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1935)