Ferrara v. Auric Min. Co.
| Decision Date | 09 January 1905 |
| Citation | 20 Colo.App. 411,79 P. 302 |
| Parties | FERRARA v. AURIC MIN. CO. |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Error to District Court, Pueblo County.
Action between Fenice Ferrara and the Auric Mining Company. From a judgment in favor of the latter, the former brings error. Motion to require plaintiff in error to file a cost bond, on which a cross-motion was filed for leave to sue in forma pauperis. Motion granted, and cross-motion denied.
M.J. Galligan, for plaintiff in error.
Wolcott, Vaile & Waterman, for defendant in error.
Defendant in error moved the court to require of plaintiff in error a cost bond. Plaintiff in error confessed the motion, and filed a cross-motion for leave to sue as a poor person. The cause has been submitted upon plaintiff in error's motion. Such applications have been repeatedly ruled upon in our Supreme Court. While there are no reported decisions of the rulings, the holding of that court has frequently and uniformly been that section 676, 1 Mills' Ann.St., permitting courts in certain cases to allow parties to sue as poor persons, does not apply to that court. The ruling is equally applicable to this court. A thorough consideration of the question presented by this motion would involve a construction of the above section of our statute, and perhaps the treaty between our country and the Kingdom of Italy. It would further, perhaps, involve a decision of the question going to the vitals of this case. We do not desire to commit ourselves on such vital question at the threshold of the case and before we have had the full aid of counsel, which we will not have before the filing of the final briefs herein. Section 676, supra, if applicable to our court, leaves to our discretion the granting of applications to sue as a poor person. Either the exercise of this discretion, if the section be applicable to our court, or acting in obedience to the unreported practice of the Supreme Court as it now obtains, is a sufficient reason for denying the motion.
The motion to sue as a poor person is denied, without intimating any opinion upon the vital question involved in the case. It is further ordered that a cost bond be filed as required by section 674, 1 Mills' Ann.St., the sufficiency of the surety on the bond to be approved by the district clerk of Pueblo county, Colo.; such bond to be filed in this court within 30 days from this date.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Ferrara v. Auric Min. Co.
-
Bell v. Simpson
...that the cases we cited with approval were consistent with the decision of the Colorado Court of Appeals in Ferrara v. Auric Mining Co., 20 Colo.App. 411, 79 P. 302 (1905), rev'd on other grounds, 43 Colo. 496, 95 P. 952 (1908). 12 Spain, 77 Colo. at 199, 235 P. at The statute in effect at ......
-
Spain v. Murry
... ... agreement with the cases hereinbefore cited. They are ... consistent with Ferrara v. Auric Min. Co., 20 Colo.App. 411, ... 79 P. 302, wherein it is stated that the rulings of this ... ...
-
Almarez v. Carpenter
...is not within the contemplation of the waiver provisions of 33--1--3. See Spain v. Murry, 77 Colo. 197, 235 P. 338; Ferrara v. Auric Mining Co., 20 Colo.App. 411, 79 P. 302; Colorado F. & I. Co. v. Menapace, 16 Colo.App. 200, 64 P. There is no language in 33---1--3 which suggests that the c......