 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cope v. Woznicki, Court of Appeals No.: 04CA1964,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In complex real estate litigation, trial court properly granted summary judgment to attorneys, and against garnishor, pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 12-5-119 and Colo. Rev. Stat. § 12-5-120, because attorneys had valid lien, and lien attached to settlements, as well as judgments.
|
|||||
| Denver jetCenter, Inc. v. Arapahoe County Bd. of Equalization, Court of Appeals No. 04CA2050,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an airport operator's challenge to the board of equalization's valuation of its property, as all areas of the operator's leased parcels outside the building footprints were subject to the operator's nonexclusive use and possession, these area were subject to the exception from valuation set forth in Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-1-103(17)(a)(II)(B).
|
|||||
| Ehrlich Feedlot, Inc. v. Oldenburg, Court of Appeals No.: 04CA0775,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute among a feedlot, attorneys, and law firm alleging, inter alia, breach of fiduciary duty, trial court did not err in granting summary judgment because the feedlot failed to file a certificate of review under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-20-602.
|
|||||
| Hanson v. Colo. Dep't of Revenue, Court of Appeals No. 04CA2292,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In department of revenue's action to collect delinquent withholding taxes and penalties against the president of a bankrupt corporation under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-21-116.5, as the president was not responsible for tax compliance by the corporation, the trial court did not err in granting his motion for summary judgment.
|
|||||
| Luebke v. Luebke, Court of Appeals No. 04CA2276,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In trust administration dispute, trustees objected to matter being heard in Colorado. Motion to dismiss was properly granted because, pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 15-16-203, Colorado courts were to refrain from entertaining proceedings; trust had been exclusively administered in Wisconsin, witnesses were located there, and Florida law applied.
|
|||||
| Martinez v. Dep't of Pers. & Admin. Exec. Office, Court of Appeals No. 04CA1174,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As former Colo. Dep't Pers./Gen. Support Serv. Regs. No. 801, 4 Colo. Code Regs. 4-11(A) conflicted with Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-112.5(5)(b) in that it modified the statutory right to be reverted to a certified position , the department of personnel's decision to administratively separate a state employee from the civil service was reversed.
|
|||||
| Monez v. Reinertson, Court of Appeals No. 04CA2043,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in dismissing state Medicaid benefit claimants' action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 because 42 U.S.C.S. § 1396a(a)(3), which required state plans to give individuals a fair hearing, featured "rights-creating" language that demonstrated congressional intent to establish a private right that could be enforced under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983.
|
|||||
| People v. Blessett, Court of Appeals No. 04CA0434,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's aggravated range sentence under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-401(6) for falsely reporting explosives was constitutional because the trial court based it in part on her conviction of misdemeanor theft in Texas, and the fact of a prior misdemeanor conviction fell within the prior conviction exception to the Apprendi rule.
|
|||||
| People v. Blinderman, Court of Appeals No.: 04CA2536,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, April 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the presumptive sentencing range for defendant's conviction of attempted unlawful distribution of a schedule II controlled substance was two to six years, denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Colo. R. Crim. P. 35(a) was proper as defendant admitted that he was on parole when he committed the offense for purposes of Blakely.
|
|||||
| People v. Rickman, Court of Appeals No. 04CA0501,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, April 20, 2006 Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was improperly convicted of violating the conditions of a bail bond because the trial court had the authority to set conditions of the bond under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-4-103 (2005), and it was not authorized to delegate this authority to a pretrial services program under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-5-105(3)(b) (2005).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
