Green v. Daniels
Citations
- 115 F. 449
- 53 C.C.A. 379
- 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4219
Syllabus
<p>Execution — Property Subject to Sale — Interest in Land Under Colorado Statute.</p> <p>The owner of the title to mining claims made a deed for the same to B., who at the same time made a deed conveying the claims to a company which had contracted for their purchase. Both deeds were placed in escrow, to be delivered to the company in case certain payments were made; otherwise to be delivered to B. The company went into possession under the contract. ■Held, that under Mills’ Ann. Codes & St. Colo. § 2582, providing that “every interest in land legal and equitable shall be subject to levy and sale under execution,” B. had an interest in the property which was subject to levy and sale, since under the escrow agreement the deed to B. was, in any event, to be delivered and to become effective; making B., in legal effect, a vendor retaining title until payment of the purchase money by the purchaser.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that the fifth Aerospatiale factor favored production because the case “involve[ed] violations of antitrust laws whose enforcement is essential to the country’s interests in a competitive economy”
- finding no viable alternative means of discovery where response to request under Hague Convention dependant on approval from ministry of foreign state
- noting the fifth factor is “considered most important by several courts” where “a case involv[ed] violations of antitrust laws whose enforcement is essential to the country’s interests in a competitive economy”
- noting the fifth factor is “considered most important by several courts” where “a case involv[ed] violations of antitrust laws whose enforcement is essential to the country’s interests in a competitive economy”
- “[E]nforcement through private civil actions . . . is a critical tool for encouraging compliance with the country’s antitrust laws.”
- “[T]he outcome of a request pursuant to the [Hague] Convention is by no means certain, and making the request will undeniably result in delays of unknown, and perhaps considerable, duration.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Thayer
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.