Trautman & Shreve of Wyoming, Inc. v. Mead & Mount Construction Co. of Wyoming, Inc.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Trautman & Shreve of Wyoming, Inc. v. Mead & Mount Construction Co. of Wyoming, Inc.

430 P.2d 474, 163 Colo. 308, 1967 Colo. LEXIS 881

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedJuly 24, 1967

DocketNo. 21624

StatusPublished

This text of 430 P.2d 474 (Trautman & Shreve of Wyoming, Inc. v. Mead & Mount Construction Co. of Wyoming, Inc.) 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

Trautman & Shreve of Wyoming, Inc. v. Mead & Mount Construction Co. of Wyoming, Inc., 430 P.2d 474, 163 Colo. 308, 1967 Colo. LEXIS 881 (Colo. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

[309]*309This is an action for water damages to a university dormitory under construction in Laramie, Wyoming. The dispute revolved around the question as to whether a mechanical joint in a certain water line constructed by sub-contractor Trautman & Shreve was properly installed. The trial court decided the matter on summary judgment in favor of the principal contractor Mead & Mount after certain interrogatories were answered and certain requests for admissions were not answered by the defendant under R.C.P. Colo. 36.

Following this matter being at issue in this court and oral argument thereon and consideration of a suggested opinion, the court, with Mr. Justice McWilliams not participating, was equally divided with Justices Sutton, Hodges and Kelley voting to affirm, and Chief Justice Moore, and Justices Day and Pringle voting to reverse. The case is therefore affirmed by operation of law.

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

Per Curiam.

[309]*309This is an action for water damages to a university dormitory under construction in Laramie, Wyoming. The dispute revolved around the question as to whether a mechanical joint in a certain water line constructed by sub-contractor Trautman & Shreve was properly installed. The trial court decided the matter on summary judgment in favor of the principal contractor Mead & Mount after certain interrogatories were answered and certain requests for admissions were not answered by the defendant under R.C.P. Colo. 36.

Following this matter being at issue in this court and oral argument thereon and consideration of a suggested opinion, the court, with Mr. Justice McWilliams not participating, was equally divided with Justices Sutton, Hodges and Kelley voting to affirm, and Chief Justice Moore, and Justices Day and Pringle voting to reverse. The case is therefore affirmed by operation of law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

430 P.2d 474, 163 Colo. 308, 1967 Colo. LEXIS 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trautman-shreve-of-wyoming-inc-v-mead-mount-construction-co-of-colo-1967.