Stevens v. Solid Muldoon Printing Co.

7 Colo. 86, 4 Colo. L. Rep. 384
Supreme Court of Colorado·Decided December 15, 1883·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The record in this case fails to disclose anything which, by the most liberal interpretation, can [87] be termed a final judgment. The nearest approach thereto is in the following language, viz.: “The court' having heard the same, this motion was granted and the action dismissed at plaintiffs costs.” This is amere dec-' laration that the action was dismissed at the plaintiff’s' costs; it does not profess to be a judgment, neither does it appear therefrom that it was intended to be such. “ A strict compliance with forms is not essential in the entry of judgments; yet to constitute a final judgment, the record must not only indicate that an adjudication took place, but the entry must have been intended as an entry, of judgment.” Alvord et al. v. McGaughey, 5 Col. 244.

There being no final judgment to either affirm or reverse, the writ of error must be dismissed.

Writ dismissed.

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

Stevens v. Solid Muldoon Printing Co., 7 Colo. 86, 4 Colo. L. Rep. 384 (Colo. 1883).

7 Colo. 86 (Stevens v. Solid Muldoon Printing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ellinwood v. Bennion
276 P. 159 (Utah Supreme Court, 1929)
Thuringer v. Bonner
219 P. 1078 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1923)
Roberts v. Strong
206 P. 1073 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1922)
Rice v. Van Why
111 P. 599 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1910)
Schecter v. White
41 Colo. 219 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1907)
Tolles v. Spencer
18 Colo. App. 294 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1903)
Hagerman v. Moore
2 Colo. App. 83 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1892)