Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

OESTEREICK v. ROPER ET AL.

1. APPEAL AND ERROR — Divided Court. One justice not participating, and the others being evenly divided as to what disposition should be made of the case, the judgment is affirmed by operation of law.

PER CURIAM.

Mr. Justice Stone did not participate in the consideration of this cause. Mr. Justice Jackson, Mr. Justice Hays and Mr. Justice Alter are of the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed, whereas, Mr. Chief Justice Hilliard, Mr. Justice Moore and Mr. Justice Holland think that it should be reversed. The judgment, therefore, must be affirmed by operation of law because of an evenly divided court, and no good purpose would be served by a statement of the issues or the reasons for the conclusions of the several members of the court. Rule 118 (f) R.C.P. Colo.

Judgment affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

OESTEREICK v. ROPER
(Jun 5, 1950)