Howard v. Lester
| Decision Date | 16 September 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 20607,20607 |
| Citation | 153 Colo. 199,385 P.2d 121 |
| Parties | H. Gordon HOWARD, Plaintiff in Error, v. Melvin C. LESTER and Esther M. Lester, Defendants in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Nolan L. Brown, Lakewood, for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendants in error.
We will refer to plaintiff in error as defendant or by name, and to defendants in error as the Lesters.
The complaint filed by the Lesters set forth two claims. In the first it was alleged that the defendant, as the agent and employee of Pre-News, Inc., obtained $500.00 from them by making 'certain false representations of present, existing facts' during negotiations between them relating to the purchase by the latter of a business known as the Wazee Lounge and Supper Club. Defendant had an exclusive broker's listing from the owners and was authorized to find a purchaser who was ready and able to buy the business on the terms dictated by the owners. He denied that any false representations were made; admitted that the Lesters paid to him the sum of $500.00, '* * * as earnest money deposit on the purchase of the Wazee Lounge'; denied that Lesters had suffered any damage; and alleged that the $500.00 'earnest money deposit has been forfeited.'
The case was tried to the court. At the close of the evidence offered by the Lesters, counsel for defendant moved to dismiss the action for the reason that the evidence had failed to establish a prima facie case. This motion was denied.
The record that has been certified to this court for review includes a reporter's transcript of the evidence which was offered on behalf of the Lesters. It also contains the motion to dismiss, together with the court's ruling thereon. At this point in the transcript we find the following:
'AND THEREAFTER, the defendant Howard, to sustain the allegations in his behalf, offered and gave into evidence the testimony of H. Gordon Howard and one Florence Rapp;
'AND, THEREAFTER, the following proceedings were had: (Here follows the findings and judgment of the court.)'
The findings and judgment of the court included the following:
Asserted grounds for reversal of the judgment are presented under three captions, the second and third of which attempt to bring into the case for the first time an issue involving an election of remedies. The arguments advanced in this connection have no support in the record, were not presented to the trial court, and we consider them no further. The only argument warranting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Colorado Real Estate Comm'n v. Bartlett, 10CA1489.
...to the Commission the same presumption given trial courts, namely, that it considered the evidence before it. See Howard v. Lester, 153 Colo. 199, 201, 385 P.2d 121, 122 (1963) (“The judgment entered by the trial court is presumed to have been entered after due consideration of all the evid......
-
Hobbs v. Smith
...court. Therefore, as stated by the Court of Appeals, the findings made by the trial court are binding upon this court. Howard v. Lester, 153 Colo. 199, 385 P.2d 121. The trial court found that the petitioner kept one to two horses in the backyard of her home, which was located in a resident......
-
Uptime Corp. v. Colorado Research Corp.
...to this Court, we must assume that the findings of fact and conclusions of law are fully supported by the evidence, Howard v. Lester, 153 Colo. 199, 385 P.2d 121; Morgan v. Wright, 156 Colo. 411, 399 P.2d 788, and that the delay in no way deprived defendant of a fair trial free from prejudi......
-
City Council v. South Suburban Park
...order is "presumed to have been entered after due consideration of all the evidence admitted upon the trial." Howard v. Lester, 153 Colo. 199, 201, 385 P.2d 121, 122 (1963). Appellate courts are "obligated to search the record for evidence to support the findings of fact." Bockstiegel v. Bd......