Court Opinion

ID: 9791007
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:03:05.536156+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:33.311375
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Pringle
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent.
In my view, Dove Creek Bank v. Lawrence, 157 Colo. 263, 402 P.2d 369, is determinative of this case. There we remanded the case for a new trial stating that the issue of whether Bruce Brandt, who was an officer of Dove Creek Bank, had knowledge that there were no commodities in the warehouse to support the receipts or whether he had knowledge of the facts sufficient to charge him with the duty of further inquiry into the situation was a question for the jury. That became the law of this case. The disputed issues of fact were submitted to the jury for determination by way of the four special interrogatories. These special interrogatories were answered by the jury in the negative.
In my view, this court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the jury and this court is bound by the jury’s determination of the disputed issues of fact, and I would affirm.
Mr. Justice Day authorizes me to say that he joins in this dissent.