Case Name: George W. Clayton College et al. v. County Court et al.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Colorado
Decision Date: 1943-02-15
Citations: 110 Colo. 365
Docket Number: No. 15,059
Parties: George W. Clayton College et al. v. County Court et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Colorado Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 365–366

Head Matter:
No. 15,059.
George W. Clayton College et al. v. County Court et al.
(135 P. [2d] 138)
Decided February 15, 1943.
Rehearing denied March 8, 1943.
Mr. Wilbur M. Alter, Mr. Ivor O. Wingren, for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. Malcom Lindsey, Mr. Frank L. Hays, for the City and County of Denver.
Mr. Gail L. Ireland, Attorney General, Mr. H. Lawrence Hinkley, Deputy, Mr. Samuel L. Fairlamb, Assistant, for the people.
En Banc.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Heretofore, because of the failure of the plaintiffs in error to comply' with the provisions of Rule 112 R.C.P. Colo., concerning the preparation and certification of the record on error, in the particulars set forth in the opinion herein, reported in 109 Colorado Reports, page 476 (126 P. 2d. 502), we ordered the writ of error dismissed unless within twenty days thereafter the plaintiffs in error should "complete the record and file a supplemental abstract thereof." Within the time allowed a supplemental abstract of record was filed, but no addition to the record whatsoever was supplied, thus leaving the record itself in the state of fatal deficiency which originally prevailed. It is to be observed, notwithstanding that the record and reporter's transcript as filed contain but 88 folios, that the first 26 pages of the supplemental abstract alone purport to abstract 184 folios of matter, apparently pertinent records of the county court, which never have been included in the record here. These anomalies, with the additional irregularities mentioned in our former opinion, still uncorrected, make obvious the failure of the plaintiffs in error to observe the procedural requirements of Rule 112, supra, and as a practical matter, also disclose the impropriety of our attempting to decide the important and far-reaching questions argued upon a record in this state of insufficiency.
Accordingly the writ of error is dismissed.