 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Goodwin v. Thieman, Court of Appeals No. 02CA1345,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because corporation that once owned land was not a public agency, it could not qualify as a quasi-municipal corporation under adverse possession statute and summary judgment was improperly granted against claimant on his adverse possession action.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Santarelli, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0788,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Probate court properly questioned the appropriateness of the personal representative and attorney fees. Because there was no substantiation or justification for the fees awarded, the probate court was authorized to order a reduction in those fees.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Zappanti, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0918,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Classifying, valuing, and dividing the husband's railroad retirement benefits as martial property was reversed and remanded, because Tier I benefits received under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 was separate property.
|
|||||
| Liscio v. Pinson, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0124,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Patient's new claims were barred by two-year statute of limitations and amended complaint would have been futile. Plaintiffs' expert's testimony was properly excluded for prejudicial effect. Discovery sanction against plaintiffs was proper.
|
|||||
| People v. Oglethorpe, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0347,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence was affirmed when the Colorado Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act of 1998 did not violate defendant's due process or equal protection rights, the separation of powers doctrine, and was not disproportionate to the offense.
|
|||||
| People v. Palmer, Court of Appeals No. 01CA0937,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was not noticed for felony murder, as the information specified the elements of burglary, including intent to commit felony menacing. An intended victim of menacing did not have to be found by the jury.
|
|||||
| People v. Weston, No. 02PDJ086,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Woellhaf, Court of Appeals No. 00CA2351,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentences based on convictions for four counts each of sexual assault on child-pattern and of sexual assault on child by one in position of trust-pattern, which were based on four sexual acts, did not violate defendant's double jeopardy rights.
|
|||||
| Walker-Lawrence v. Dist. Court, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0849,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, June 19, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner, in entering a guilty plea under the plea agreement, validly waived several rights, including the right to request sealing the record; thus, the trial court properly denied petitioner's request to seal the record.
|
|||||
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. |
