 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Rutt v. Poudre Educ. Ass'n, Court of Appeals No. 05CA1718,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION A, July 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in dismissing citizens' claims that labor organizations illegally contributed to the campaign of a candidate for state senate as the organizations' coordinated activities constituted an illegal contribution under Colo. Const. art. XXVIII, § 2(5)(a)(IV) and violated Colo. Const. art. XXVIII, § 3(4)(a).
|
|||||
| People v. Fenili, 06PDJ056.,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, July 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. O'Malley, 06PDJ053,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, July 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Tenbrink, 06PDJ051,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, July 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Thompson, Case Number: 05PDJ077,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, July 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was disbarred for violating Colo. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.15(a), 1.16(d), and 8.4(c) when he represented a minor client in becoming legally emancipated from her parents, he accepted retainer funds, misrepresented the status of the case with a forged document, and eventually abandoned the client without refunding the retainer funds.
|
|||||
| People ex rel. J.L.M., Court of Appeals No.: 06CA0454,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, July 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly terminated a father's parental rights but not the mother's under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-3-604(1)(c) as the mother had a full time job and a close, extended family, while the father provided no financial support, had ineffective parenting abilities, and was disinclined to effectuate any change in his situation.
|
|||||
| People ex rel. PUC of Colo. v. Entrup, Court of Appeals No.: 05CA0130,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, July 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In review of contempt order and sanctions imposed in dispute between Colorado Public Utilities Commission and business owner, business owner could not rely on Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination to avoid production of business records because the privilege did not protect contents of voluntarily prepared business records.
|
|||||
| Danielson v. Dennis, Case No. 06SA174,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, July 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parolees sought to register to vote. Colo. Rev. Stat. 1-2-103(4), which prevented them from registering and voting, did not conflict with Colo. Const. art. VII, § 10 because parolees had not yet served their full terms of imprisonment with the meaning of Colo. Const. art. VII, § 10. Imprisonment and parole were penalty's separate components.
|
|||||
| K.D. v. People (In re K.D.), Case No. 05SC808,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, July 31, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father's incarceration alone was insufficient to work a forfeiture of parental rights under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-3-604(1)(c), but, child's best interests were primary and controlling issue in termination proceedings and Supreme Court of Colorado concluded trial court properly considered parental incarceration as one of several significant factors.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
