 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Colo. State Bd. of Accountancy v. Arthur Andersen L.L.P., Court of Appeals No.: 03CA1872,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, February 10, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As Colo. Rev. Stat. § 12-2-126(1)(a)(I) (2004) authorized the Colorado State Board of Accountancy to investigate an accounting firm accused of improprieties, even though it had relinquished its Colorado accounting license, the trial court properly issued an order enforcing an administrative subpoena duces tecum that the Board served on the firm.
|
|||||
| Grabler v. Allen, Court of Appeals No.: 03CA1246,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, February 10, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a public university's trailer was attached to a borrowed truck, but was driven by an agent for university purposes, the combination of the motor vehicle pulling the trailer constituted a "motor vehicle" for the limited purpose of governmental immunity under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-106(1)(a) (2004).
|
|||||
| In re D.C., Court of Appeals No.: 04CA0249,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, February 10, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly determined it lacked jurisdiction to grant grandparent visitation to grandmother because, under plain language of Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-117(1) (2004), there had been no judicial intervention into marriage of the children's parents, judicial placement of the children outside their family, or death of the grandparent's child.
|
|||||
| Montoya v. Trinidad State Nursing Home, Court of Appeals No.: 04CA0824,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, February 10, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A state nursing home did not constitute a hospital for purposes of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-101 et seq. (2004), and a trial court erred by finding that the nursing home's immunity had been waived.
|
|||||
| People v. Blankenship, Court of Appeals No.: 03CA0665,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, February 10, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of a juvenile's application for post-conviction relief was proper where Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-2-511(2)(a)(III) did not confer a fundamental right and was constitutional under a rational basis standard.
|
|||||
| Fognani v. Young, Case No. 04SA303,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, February 14, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was properly disqualified from representing clients at trial under Colo. R. Prof. Conduct 3.7, as record showed he was likely to be a necessary witness at trial; however, he was not to be disqualified from participating in pretrial activities unless such participation would be revealed to the jury such that Rule 3.7 would be undermined.
|
|||||
| People v. Vazquez, Case No. 04SA199,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, February 22, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly suppressed defendant's verbal and nonverbal statements to a police officer because its finding that the encounter between defendant and the officer constituted custodial interrogation with no prior advisements as required by the Fifth Amendment was clearly supported by defendant's testimony.
|
|||||
| Robbins v. People , Case No. 03SC563,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, February 22, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Postconviction motion claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel was barred by laches because the timing was suspect and the State established prejudice, in that motion was brought more than 30 years after conviction and 8 months after counsel died. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-5-402 did not impose an absolute limitation, but laches was available.
|
|||||
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. |
