 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown Group Retail, Inc. v. State, Court of Appeals No. 04CA1874,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Group's property sat next to Colorado Department of Transportation property where chemicals were deposited that contaminated groundwater and migrated to adjacent areas. Under Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-101 et seq., trespass and negligence claims were properly dismissed because group failed to give timely notice.
|
|||||
| Calvert v. Indus. Claim Appeals Office, Court of Appeals No. 05CA1201,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employee's 2004 petition to reopen 1997 workers' compensation claim was properly denied where it was filed outside the time limits set forth in Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-43-303(1) and (2)(a); fact that the employee was entitled to 2004 back surgery as a Grover-type benefit did not extend the limitations period for reopening his disability benefit claim.
|
|||||
| Gold v. Duncan Ostrander & Dingess, P.C., Court of Appeals No. 05CA0870,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly entered judgment on an attorney's lien pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 12-5-119 (2005) where the law firm's motion to reduce its lien to judgment, filed four months after the notice of the attorney's lien, was filed within a reasonable time.
|
|||||
| Hathaway Lighting, Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Office, Court of Appeals No.: 05CA1630,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a worker's compensation matter, no jurisdiction existed to hear claims under extraterritorial provisions of Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-41-204 because claimant was only entitled to compensation for six months after physically leaving state. In this case, claimant was never in Colorado.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Ikeler, Court of Appeals No. 05CA0649,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In marital dissolution, trial court did not err in allowing wife to use car because, under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-10-113(1), car was husband's separate property, but trial court did not award any ownership interest to the wife. Trial court erred in awarding wife attorney fees because couple had agreed that each would pay own fees.
|
|||||
| Meyer v. Dep't of Revenue, Motor Vehicle Div., Court of Appeals No.: 05CA0489,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case involving a driver's license revocation, a trial court erred when it found that the Colorado Department of Revenue, Motor Vehicle Division, confessed a driver's res judicata motion under Colo. R. Civ. P. 121, § 1-15 when no responsive brief was filed; the driver had the burden of proving his contention that res judicata applied.
|
|||||
| Olivas-Soto v. Indus. Claim Appeals Office, Court of Appeals No.: 05CA2509,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an employee's action for benefits for an industrial injury, because the issues of permanent total disability and post-maximum medical improvement medical benefits were not endorsed within 30 days of the employee's final admission of liability, those issues were closed under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-43-303.
|
|||||
| People v. Diaz-Garcia, Court of Appeals No.: 04CA2658,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-4-112, and not § 16-4-108, was proper statute to apply when determining whether the surety was entitled to relief from the forfeiture judgment; the surety did not make efforts to obtain defendant's presence in the United States and waited several months until after judgment was entered before taking any action to forfeiture.
|
|||||
| People v. Miller, Court of Appeals No. 02CA0850,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Search of defendant's home was illegal because the warrantless search of his shared dwelling for evidence over his express refusal of consent could not be justified as reasonable as to defendant on the basis of consent given to the police by his wife.
|
|||||
| People v. Pahl, Court of Appeals No.: 01CA2020,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, August 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's theft from an at-risk adult conviction under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-6.5-103(5) was reversed because while the evidence was sufficient to support a reasonable inference the trust and the corporation were victims of theft, it only showed that the individuals served as conduits for the money between the corporation and trust and defendant.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
