Schwalbe v. Postle, 11271.

Citation249 P. 495, 80 Colo. 1
Case DateJune 21, 1926
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

Rehearing Denied Sept. 27, 1926.

Error to District Court, City and County of Denver; Julian H Moore, Judge.

Action by David E. Postle and another, doing business under the firm name and style of Postle & Fischer, against Barbara E Schwalbe. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error.


W. B. Morgan and Charles H. Small, both of Denver for plaintiff in error.

Frederick Sass and Charles F. Morris, both of Denver, for defendants in error.


This is an action brought by defendants in error against Barbara E Schwalbe, for services as architects in preparing plans, drawings, and specifications for a hotel building proposed to be erected in Oak Park, Cook county, Ill. The plaintiffs had judgment, and the defendant comes here on error to review that judgment. The parties will be designated as in the court below.

The first trial of the case resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiffs, which was reviewed here (Schwalbe v. Postle, 73 Colo. 181, 214 P. 388), reversed, and remanded for a new trial. The second trial resulted the same as the first, and we are now called upon to review the second judgment entered against the defendant.

The contention that the court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant is without merit. We have taken the pains to examine the transcript, and have read all of the evidence brought into the record by the bill of exceptions, and, after doing so, we have no doubt as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and the judgment.

It is further urged that the testimony of the witness Snodgrass, taken at the first trial, was improperly received in evidence. The testimony at the last trial showed that the witness Snodgrass was beyond the jurisdiction of the court. The testimony was positive and uncontradicted that the witness was in Hollywood, Cal. This was primarily a question for the trial court, and, the court having held the showing sufficient, its finding will not be disturbed on review. When the trial court determined that these facts had been established by the evidence, then the testimony of Snodgrass, taken at the former trial, preserved, and identified by the bill of exceptions prepared and brought here by the defendant on the first review, was clearly competent evidence on the second trial.

The defendant further contends that the amended pleading...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • New York Cent. R. Co. v. Pinnell
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • April 14, 1942
    ... ... Wilson v. State, ... 1911, 175 Ind. 458, 466, 93 N.E. 609; Pine Bluff Co. v ... Bobbitt, 1927, 174 Ark. 41, 294 S.W. 1002; Schwalbe ... v. Postle, 1926, 80 Colo. 1, 249 P. 495; Herndon v ... Chamberlain, 1929, 39 Ga.App. 207, 146 S.E. 503; ... Bielski v. Rising, 1932, 163 ... ...
  • Hicks v. Cramer
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • April 1, 1929
    ... ... For these reasons, we declined to pass upon the objection ... Supreme Court rule No. 7; Schwalbe v. Postle, [85 Colo. 418] ... 80 Colo. 1, 249 P. 495; Sandner v. Temmer, 81 Colo. 57, 253 ... P. 400; Koontz v. People, 82 Colo. 589, 263 P. 19 ... ...
  • Colorado Nat. Bank v. Ashcraft
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • December 19, 1927
    ...trial court's attention to any specific item of special damages and claim that it is objectionable. Supreme Court rule 7; Schwalbe v. Postle, 80 Colo. 1, 249 P. 495; Sandner Temmer, 81 Colo. 57, 253 P. 400; Koontz v. People (Colo.) 263 P. 19. This part of the objection is based upon the bro......
  • Sandner v. Temmer, 11524.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • February 14, 1927
    ... ... error made a general objection ... [81 ... Colo. 58] We said, in Schwalbe v. Postle, 80 Colo. 1, 249 P ... 'Our ... established practice requires a party to make specific ... objections to an instruction in the ... ...

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