 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allen v. Martin, Court of Appeals No. 06CA 1768,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a client's legal malpractice claims were compulsory counterclaims in an action to collect legal fees filed by a first law firm, Colo. R. Civ. P. 13(a) barred all of the client's claims against one law firm and all attorneys for their conduct while they were working at that firm.
|
|||||
| Barrett v. Inv. Mgmt. Consultants, Court of Appeals No. 07CA0337,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute between an investor and consultants, which was submitted to arbitration, trial court did not err in confirming arbitrators' award of attorney fees to investor because assessment of fees was available under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 11-51-604 and under federal law. Also, district court did not in ordering postjudgment interest.
|
|||||
| Currier v. Sutherland, Court of Appeals No. 07CA1263,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly dismissed cyclists' personal injury action against a motorist because even though motorist had died, a new action against estate administrator and estate could not be brought under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-80-111, and amended complaint could not relate back under Colo. R. Civ. P. 15(c).
|
|||||
| Gonzales v. Mascarenas, Court of Appeals No. 06CA1903,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A wrongful death action under Colorado's wrongful death statute, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-202, could be maintained for the death of a nonviable fetus born alive. Such an action could also be maintained where the child, though born alive, was not viable at birth.
|
|||||
| INB Land & Cattle, LLC v. Kerr-McGee Rocky Mt. Corp., Court of Appeals No. 07CA0722,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In limited liability corporation's suit against mineral company alleging mineral trespass, conversion, and civil theft, a trial court did not err in denying relief with respect to draining of minerals because rule of capture pursuant to Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 34-60-101 to 34-60-129, applied.
|
|||||
| Pullen v. Walker, Court of Appeals No. 06CA2238,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not effectively divest itself of jurisdiction by appointing as a special master a person who was not an active judge, and did not exceed its authority under Colo. R. Civ. P. 53 in appointing the master to oversee discovery and in limiting master's powers as ordered because nothing in Rule 53 required that master be active judge.
|
|||||
| Schultz v. Stanton, Court of Appeals No. 06CA2338,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a legal malpractice case, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for defendants based upon issue preclusion. Because defendants did not conclusively prove that any of the issues, including causation issue, was actually and necessarily decided, summary judgment based on issue preclusion could not stand.
|
|||||
| Shafron v. Cooke, Court of Appeals No. 07CA0504,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, June 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Driver's license was properly revoked for refusal to take breath or blood test for alcohol level required by Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-126 (2007), because officer had reasonable suspicion to stop driver pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 42-4-1101(1), (2)(h), 42-4-1102(2), (3), and traffic-control-device manual adopted by Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-4-104.
|
|||||
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. |
