 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bd. of County Comm'rs for Larimer County v. Gurtler, Court of Appeals No. 06CA0927,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Owner's due process rights were not violated when the trial court entered judgment in the amount of accrued fines without conducting an additional hearing, because the owner was on notice that fines would accrue until he complied with the contempt order, and the owner did not assert that he had complied, even partially, with the contempt order.
|
|||||
| Colo. v. Lovato, Court of Appeals No. 04CA1177,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed defendant's conviction, rejecting defendant's argument that Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-6.5-103(2) (2006) created a sentence enhancer and not a substantive offense. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-6.5-103(2) did not merely incorporate the elements of another offense. Instead, it combined several elements to create a separate substantive offense.
|
|||||
| Hanna v. State Farm Ins. Co., Court of Appeals No. 05CA2469,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In correcting jury award on appeal, appellate court held trial court had sufficient authority to have corrected the verdict under an exception to rules restricting inquiry into the jury's intention and exception could be applied because, inter alia, even though the jury had been discharged, it had not dispersed and was still in the court's control.
|
|||||
| In re C.T.G., Court of Appeals No. 05CA0783,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Stepfather and mother separated in 2002, stepfather had not had physical care of the mother's child since then, his motion for visitation was filed in Colorado in 2005, and it was not filed within six months of the termination of his physical care of the child; thus, the requirements of Colo. Rev. Stat. § 14-10-123(1) were not satisfied.
|
|||||
| People v. Corral, Court of Appeals No. 05CA1979,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's right to due process was violated because, at the plea hearing under Colo. R. Crim. P. 11, the court advised defendant that his potential sentence was between two and six years; however, at the sentencing hearing, a different prosecutor asked for a sentence in the aggravated range, and the court sentenced defendant to twelve years.
|
|||||
| Rancho Escondido Prop. Owners Ass'n v. Redstone Mgmt. Co., Court of Appeals No. 06CA1739,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Homeowners association's judgment liens were not superior to a company's deed of trust lien; although the judgment liens arose from declaration assessment liens that, in part, existed before the deed of trust was recorded, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-52-102(1) provided that the assessment liens only became liens on the property upon recording.
|
|||||
| Svanidze v. Kirkendall, Court of Appeals No. 05CA1699,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A grant of summary judgment against a corporation and its president in a quiet title action was proper because the purchaser of the bed and breakfast was a bona fide purchaser and because the bank was a bona fide encumbrancer under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-30-114(2).
|
|||||
| Weitz Co., LLC v. Mid Century Ins. Co., Court of Appeals No. 06CA0163,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under the plain and ordinary meaning of "arising out of your ongoing operations," an additional insured endorsement to general liability insurance policy did not cover subcontractor's "completed operations," and subcontractor's insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify general contractor, the additional insured, in its suit against subcontractor.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
