 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Alexander v. Indus. Claim Appeals Office, Court of Appeals No. 00CA1061,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Statutory limitation provision for workers' compensation cases ensured finality and prompt recovery of reimbursement. Statute did not deny employee access to the courts because employee failed to file timely claim and it was not covered.
|
|||||
| Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Taylor, Court of Appeals No. 99CA2388,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arbitrator did not exceed his authority to determine benefits payable to insured. Award was not modifiable. Insurer waived affirmative defenses and failed to meet burdens of production and proof on policy limits and setoffs.
|
|||||
| Great Neck Plaza, L.P. v. Le Peep Rests., Court of Appeals No. 00CA1405,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Funds were properly garnished against a company's bank account where the company and the judgment debtor were alter egos of the same corporation.
|
|||||
| Green Valley Fin. Holdings v. Green, Court of Appeals No. 00CA2060,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in ordering trust assets be returned to wife and deceased husband's estate and trust be terminated where record supported finding that wife and husband were settlors and wife and estate were sole beneficiaries of trust.
|
|||||
| People v. Baker, Court of Appeals No. 00CA1134,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Information was sufficient to support guilty verdict for violating bail bond conditions, and trial court's ability to craft bail bond conditions was not unconstitutional delegation of authority to define criminal offense.
|
|||||
| People v. Collins, Court of Appeals No. 00CA1396,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State could appeal finding of no probable cause. Evidence was insufficient to establish probable cause for burglary as finding would have required inference that defendant who did not take part in actual crime knew crime would occur.
|
|||||
| People v. Forsythe, Court of Appeals No. 99CA2472,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not follow statutory procedures before custody of child could be taken away from parent; therefore, conditions were void. Trial court did not abuse discretion by requiring defendant to have supervised contact with her children.
|
|||||
| People v. Myers, Court of Appeals No. 99CA1379,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse discretion in sentencing defendant who admitted sexually assaulting his step-daughter for over fours years to maximum presumptive sentence. Defendant was subject to discretionary parole rather than mandatory parole.
|
|||||
| People v. Slusher, Court of Appeals No. 99CA1677,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion for postconviction relief was time-barred and he failed to allege facts amounting to justifiable excuse or excusable neglect.
|
|||||
| Pueblo Bancorporation v. Lindoe, Inc., Court of Appeals No. 00CA1777,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, August 16, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in applying discounts in appraising fair value of stock, because, in case of going concern, no minority discount was to be applied, and, except under extraordinary circumstances, no marketability discount was to be applied.
|
|||||
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. |
