Williams v. Smith

Supreme Court of Colorado

Williams v. Smith

238 P. 40, 77 Colo. 572, 1925 Colo. LEXIS 506

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedJune 22, 1925

DocketNo. 11,236.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 238 P. 40 (Williams v. Smith) 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

Williams v. Smith, 238 P. 40, 77 Colo. 572, 1925 Colo. LEXIS 506 (Colo. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Denison

delivered the opinion of the court.

Smith brought mandamus against the building inspector, Williams, to compel him to issue a permit for a public garage. She obtained a judgment; the case was brought here and reversed, 76 Colo. 151, 230 Pac. 395. The ground of reversal was that an issue of fact, that is, whether plaintiff had expended money on the faith of a permit which had beeri afterwards revoked, was still undetermined. That issue has now been tried and determined in favor of the plaintiff, and the building inspector brings the case here again. His principal point is that we were wrong in the former opinion in saying that the question of public health and safety was forestalled by the action of the council in granting the leave to build, under Pratt v. Denver, 72 Colo. 51, 209 Pac. 508. He argues that the city may and' it is its duty to suppress everything dangerous to public health and safety, and that no permit can be granted for such a thing. The proposition is undoubtedly right but the question of danger or not is for the council, and they, having determined it, cannot afterwards revoke their decision, on the same evidence, to the detriment of the licensee who has substantially altered his position in reliance on it.

The supersedeas is denied and judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Allen and Mr. Justice Whitford concur.

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

Mr. Justice Denison

delivered the opinion of the court.

Smith brought mandamus against the building inspector, Williams, to compel him to issue a permit for a public garage. She obtained a judgment; the case was brought here and reversed, 76 Colo. 151, 230 Pac. 395. The ground of reversal was that an issue of fact, that is, whether plaintiff had expended money on the faith of a permit which had beeri afterwards revoked, was still undetermined. That issue has now been tried and determined in favor of the plaintiff, and the building inspector brings the case here again. His principal point is that we were wrong in the former opinion in saying that the question of public health and safety was forestalled by the action of the council in granting the leave to build, under Pratt v. Denver, 72 Colo. 51, 209 Pac. 508. He argues that the city may and' it is its duty to suppress everything dangerous to public health and safety, and that no permit can be granted for such a thing. The proposition is undoubtedly right but the question of danger or not is for the council, and they, having determined it, cannot afterwards revoke their decision, on the same evidence, to the detriment of the licensee who has substantially altered his position in reliance on it.

The supersedeas is denied and judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Allen and Mr. Justice Whitford concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 P. 40, 77 Colo. 572, 1925 Colo. LEXIS 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-smith-colo-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack