Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United States | 1-929-605-4013

Four Strong Winds, Inc. v. Lyngholm

Document Cited authorities 7 Cited in 37 Precedent Map Related
Decision Date16 January 1992
Citation826 P.2d 414
Docket Number90CA1711
PartiesFOUR STRONG WINDS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Odd LYNGHOLM, Third-Party Plaintiff and Defendant-Appellant, v. Michael CHAUSSEE, Third-Party Defendant-Appellee. . III
CourtColorado Court of Appeals
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
34 cases
  • J.P. v. District Court In and For 2nd Judicial Dist. of Denver
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • May 2, 1994
    ...surprise and to give each party the opportunity to prepare adequately for trial. Freedman, 849 P.2d at 815; Four Strong Winds, Inc. v. Lyngholm, 826 P.2d 414 (Colo.App.1992). In order to allow parties to prepare for trial, Rule 16 (a) Disclosure. In every action each party shall file with t......
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. RBS Acceptance Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Colorado
    • January 30, 2020
    ...a contract that specifies the rate at which interest should accrue in the event of default. See, e.g. , Four Strong Winds, Inc. v. Lyngholm , 826 P.2d 414, 415, 420 (Colo. App. 1992) (awarding interest at agreed-upon rate in action to collect money due on promissory note); Ebrahimi v. E.F. ......
  • In re M.E.R-L.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • December 17, 2020
    ...But in any event, Rule 16 does not require a trial court to exclude an untimely disclosed witness. See Four Strong Winds, Inc. v. Lyngholm , 826 P.2d 414, 417 (Colo. App. 1992) ("[I]t generally rests within the sound discretion of the trial court to enforce [the Rule 16 witness disclosure] ......
  • Resort Funding, L.L.C. v. Canyonview Dev., L.P.
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • August 30, 2012
    ...26 S.W.2d 876 (Ark. 1930); Aviation Brake Sys., Ltd. v. Voorhis, 183 Cal. Rptr. 766 (Cal. App. 1982); Four Strong Winds, Inc. v. Lyngholm, 826 P.2d 414 (Colo. App. 1992); State ex rel. Pope v. Germania Bank of St. Paul, 118 N.W. 683 (Minn. 1908); Citibank, N.A. v. T. T. P. Realty Corp., 417......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Amidst the Walking Dead: Judicial and Nonjudicial Approaches for Eradicating Zombie Mortgages
    • United States
    • Emory University School of Law Emory Law Journal No. 65-3, 2016
    • Invalid date
    ...Code. Ann. § 2735.01 (West 2006).100. Nelson & Whitman, supra note 70, § 4.33, at 217.101. See, e.g., Four Strong Winds, Inc. v. Lyngholm, 826 P.2d 414 (Colo. App. 1992); Zeligman v. Juergens, 762 P.2d 783 (Colo. App. 1988). 102. See Patrick A. Randolph Jr., The Mortgagee's interest in Rent......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT