 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| City of Golden v. Simpson, No. 02SA364,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, January 12, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a city diverted water in violation of a water right decree, the water court acted within its discretion in dismissing, after one hearing, the city's motion and complaint for injunctive relief against enforcement of a cease-and-desist order.
|
|||||
| People v. Platt, Case No. 03SA217,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, January 12, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The suppression of defendant's statements to the police was improper where the record demonstrated, under the totality of the circumstances, that defendant voluntarily spoke to the police and made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights.
|
|||||
| Hartman v. Cmty. Responsibility Ctr., Inc., Court of Appeals No. 02CA2525,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, January 15, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee who prevailed against her employer in a Wage Act case was properly awarded reasonable fees for two attorneys who represented her during trial; she was also entitled to an award of fees incurred to defend the employer's counterclaims.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Bertsch, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0888,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, January 15, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in allocating parental responsibilities of the couple's two children to the husband, although there was some indication that the husband had a past history of abuse.
|
|||||
| Poly Trucking, Inc. v. Concentra Health Servs., Court of Appeals No. 02CA2429,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, January 15, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a wrongful death action against a truck driver, his employer, and a medical certification company, the employer had no duty to disclose to the company during settlement negotiations an intent to file suit against the company's doctors.
|
|||||
| McDonnell v. People, Case Number: 03PDJ063,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, January 23, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was readmitted to the practice of law having demonstrated he had undergone a fundamental character change, acknowledged the wrongfulness of his conduct (conversion of client funds), demonstrated remorse, and accepted responsibility.
|
|||||
| C.S. v. People (In the Interest of I.S.), Consolidated Cases No. 03SC335, No. 03SC336,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, January 26, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A mother's parental rights were properly terminated where she did not have a stable home, she discontinued drug and alcohol monitoring, she failed to keep a safe, secure home for her children or herself, and the conditions were unlikely to change.
|
|||||
| Davidson v. Sandstrom, Case No. 03SC287,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, January 26, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a district attorney was a "nonjudicial elected official," he was subject to the constitutional term limitation requirements; however, a board of county commissioners was allowed to submit a measure to the voters of the judicial district.
|
|||||
| People v. Trujillo, Case No. 02SC630,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, January 26, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Upon defendant's retrial for first-degree assault, the trial court did not deny defendant's due process rights by denying instructions on resisting arrest and reckless endangerment; his theory of defense was adequately presented to the jury.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
