 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| People ex rel. J.A.E.S., No. 99CA0572,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgments ordering child support and payment of arrearages were affirmed, since law creating the obligations did not violate ex post facto clauses, and did not implicate due process or equal protection concerns.
|
|||||
| People v. Barnard, No. 98CA0277,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial judge did not commit reversible error when, in polling the jury, a juror responded that the verdict was her verdict "under duress," and the court then directed the jury to deliberate further, and ultimately declared a mistrial.
|
|||||
| People v. Gay, No. 98CA1517,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Drug conviction reversed; unintentionally reversing a prior suppression ruling and making defendant choose between his right to testify or risking impeachment with statements not proven to be voluntary was plain error.
|
|||||
| People v. Palmer, No. 98CA1216,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute was remanded for further proceedings because the lower court erred in not applying the Wilson factors to determine competency to stand trial.
|
|||||
| People v. Pollard, No. 97CA1981,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A defendant was convicted of violating the Colorado Organized Crime Control Act, where there was sufficient evidence involving defendant's theft of money in the record to support his conviction.
|
|||||
| Potter v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 99CA0146,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where ambiguity existed in insurer's contract related to the phrase "living with" in the policy's exclusion section, a question of material fact remained which precluded summary judgment.
|
|||||
| Quintana v. City of Westminster, No. 98CA2240,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment vacated and remanded because court failed to find if police officer's actions during chase of suspect endangered life or property for purpose of determining if injured bystander's claim was barred by Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.
|
|||||
| Salazar v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of Colo., No. 99CA0895,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A workers' compensation claimant who received permanent total disability benefits at the maximum capped rate was also entitled to cost of living adjustment (COLA) because the COLA provision, being last enacted, prevailed.
|
|||||
| Unigard Sec. Ins. Co. v. Mission Ins. Co. Trust, No. 98CA1326, No. 98CA2546,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, February 3, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The grant of summary judgment in a declaratory action between insurers that issued policies to the same insured was reversed because the statutory notice of reduction in coverage was not required to replace a binder with the policy itself.
|
|||||
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. |
