Sterling City G. & S. Mining Co. v. Hughes
This text of 3 Colo. 229 (Sterling City G. & S. Mining Co. v. Hughes) 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.
Opinion
In the case of the Sterling City Mining Co. v. Cock, 2 Col. 24, it wa3 held that judgment must first be obtained against the plaintiff in the attachment suit before an action can be maintained upon a bond given pursuant to Revised Statutes, and conditioned to pay all such damages as shall be awarded against the plaintiff in attachment in any suit or suits which may thereafter be brought for wrongfully suing out the attachment. We see no reason to question the correctness of this decision. Holcomb v. Faxworth, 34 Miss. 265; Sledger v. Lee, 19 Ga. 411; Davis v. Gully, 2 Dev. & Bat. 360.
The recovery against Cock, one of the copartners in the plaintiff company, does not satisfy the rule.
Judgment affirmed with costs.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Colo. 229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sterling-city-g-s-mining-co-v-hughes-colo-1877.